IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v7y2019i03p641-649_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Prevalence and Severity of Underreporting Bias in Machine- and Human-Coded Data

Author

Listed:
  • Bagozzi, Benjamin E.
  • Brandt, Patrick T.
  • Freeman, John R.
  • Holmes, Jennifer S.
  • Kim, Alisha
  • Palao Mendizabal, Agustin
  • Potz-Nielsen, Carly

Abstract

Textual data are plagued by underreporting bias. For example, news sources often fail to report human rights violations. Cook et al. propose a multi-source estimator to gauge, and to account for, the underreporting of state repression events within human codings of news texts produced by the Agence France-Presse and Associated Press. We evaluate this estimator with Monte Carlo experiments, and then use it to compare the prevalence and seriousness of underreporting when comparable texts are machine coded and recorded in the World-Integrated Crisis Early Warning System dataset. We replicate Cook et al.’s investigation of human-coded state repression events with our machine-coded events, and validate both models against an external measure of human rights protections in Africa. We then use the Cook et al. estimator to gauge the seriousness and prevalence of underreporting in machine and human-coded event data on human rights violations in Colombia. We find in both applications that machine-coded data are as valid as human-coded data.

Suggested Citation

  • Bagozzi, Benjamin E. & Brandt, Patrick T. & Freeman, John R. & Holmes, Jennifer S. & Kim, Alisha & Palao Mendizabal, Agustin & Potz-Nielsen, Carly, 2019. "The Prevalence and Severity of Underreporting Bias in Machine- and Human-Coded Data," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 641-649, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:7:y:2019:i:03:p:641-649_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847018000110/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:7:y:2019:i:03:p:641-649_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.