IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v35y2001i3p325-341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Agreement in Ordered Rating Scales

Author

Listed:
  • Cees Van Der Eijk

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Cees Van Der Eijk, 2001. "Measuring Agreement in Ordered Rating Scales," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 325-341, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:35:y:2001:i:3:p:325-341
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1010374114305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1010374114305
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1010374114305?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McClosky, Herbert, 1964. "Consensus and Ideology in American Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 361-382, June.
    2. McClosky, Herbert, 1964. "Consensus and Ideology in American Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 361-382, June.
    3. McClosky, Herbert & Hoffmann, Paul J. & O'Hara, Rosemary, 1960. "Issue Conflict and Consensus among Party Leaders and Followers1," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 54(2), pages 406-427, June.
    4. Pomper, Gerald M., 1972. "From Confusion to Clarity: Issues and American Voters, 1956–1968," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 415-428, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joeri Hofmans & Peter Theuns & Frederik Acker, 2009. "Combining quality and quantity. A psychometric evaluation of the self-anchoring scale," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 703-716, September.
    2. Prakash Kumar Paudel & Rabin Bastola & Sanford D. Eigenbrode & Amaël Borzée & Santosh Thapa & Dana Rad & Jayaraj Vijaya Kumaran & Suganthi Appalasamy & Mohammad Mosharraf Hossain & Anirban Ash & Raju , 2022. "Perspectives of scholars on the origin, spread and consequences of COVID-19 are diverse but not polarized," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Lindgren, Charlie, 2021. "Discontinuities: What is the value of having the lowest price or highest consumer rating on a price comparison website?," HFI Working Papers 19, Institute of Retail Economics (Handelns Forskningsinstitut).
    4. Caroline Close & Lidia Nunez Lopez, 2016. "At the root of parliamentary party cohesion: the role of intraparty heterogeneity and party ideology," CEVIPOL Working Papers 1/2016, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    5. Kyriaki Nanou & Galina Zapryanova & Fanni Toth, 2017. "An ever-closer union? Measuring the expansion and ideological content of European Union policy-making through an expert survey," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(4), pages 678-693, December.
    6. Kroh, Martin, 2007. "Measuring Left-Right Political Orientation: The Choice of Response Format," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 71(2), pages 204-220.
    7. Dolnicar, Sara & Grün, Bettina, 2009. "Does one size fit all? The suitability of answer formats for different constructs measured," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 58-64.
    8. Catherine E. de Vries, 2007. "Sleeping Giant: Fact or Fairytale?," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 363-385, September.
    9. Fiachra Kennedy & Pat Lyons & Peter Fitzgerald, 2006. "Pragmatists, Ideologues and the General Law of Curvilinear Disparity: The Case of the Irish Labour Party," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(4), pages 786-805, December.
    10. Joep Burger & Jacqueline Beuningen, 2020. "Measuring well-being dispersion on discrete rating scales," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 749-773, June.
    11. Feng Mao & Joshua D. Miller & Sera L. Young & Stefan Krause & David M. Hannah, 2022. "Inequality of household water security follows a Development Kuznets Curve," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Aeppli, Clem & Ruedin, Didier, 2022. "How to Measure Agreement, Consensus, and Polarization in Ordinal Data," SocArXiv syzbr, Center for Open Science.
    13. Davide Angelucci & Pierangelo Isernia, 2020. "Politicization and security policy: Parties, voters and the European Common Security and Defense Policy," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(1), pages 64-86, March.
    14. Nicolae Tarbă & Mihai-Lucian Voncilă & Costin-Anton Boiangiu, 2022. "On Generalizing Sarle’s Bimodality Coefficient as a Path towards a Newly Composite Bimodality Coefficient," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Till Weber, 2007. "Campaign Effects and Second-Order Cycles," European Union Politics, , vol. 8(4), pages 509-536, December.
    16. Agnieszka Walczak & Wouter van der Brug, 2013. "Representation in the European Parliament: Factors affecting the attitude congruence of voters and candidates in the EP elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, March.
    17. Valérie Bérenger & Jacques Silber, 2022. "On the Measurement of Happiness and of its Inequality," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 861-902, March.
    18. Martin Kroh, 2005. "Surveying the Left-Right Dimension: The Choice of a Response Format," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 491, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Byron Shafer & Richard Spady, 2002. "The issue context of modern American politics: semiparametric identification of latent factors from Discrete data," CeMMAP working papers CWP16/02, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. April K. Clark & Michael Clark & Marie A. Eisenstein, 2014. "Stability and Change," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, March.
    3. Ashley Jardina & Robert Mickey, 2022. "White Racial Solidarity and Opposition to American Democracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 79-89, January.
    4. Riccardo Ladini & Nicola Maggini, 2023. "The role of party preferences in explaining acceptance of freedom restrictions in a pandemic context: the Italian case," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(1), pages 99-123, April.
    5. Quinton Mayne & Brigitte Geißel, 2018. "Don’t Good Democracies Need “Good” Citizens? Citizen Dispositions and the Study of Democratic Quality," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 33-47.
    6. T. Y. Wang & Lu‐huei Chen, 2008. "Political Tolerance in Taiwan: Democratic Elitism in a Polity Under Threat," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(3), pages 780-801, September.
    7. Bjørnskov, Christian, 2005. "Political Ideology and Economic Freedom," Working Papers 05-8, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    8. Christian Weyand, 2013. "Why Political Elites Support Governmental Transparency. Self-Interest, Anticipation of Voters' Preferences or Socialization?," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 04-02, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    9. C. Middendorp & G. Vries, 1981. "Attitudinal referents, statement items and response set: The effect of using differential item-formats on the structure of an ideological domain," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 249-277, June.
    10. Nam, Taewoo, 2019. "Understanding the gap between perceived threats to and preparedness for cybersecurity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    11. Schäfer, Armin, 2011. "Republican liberty and compulsory voting," MPIfG Discussion Paper 11/17, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    12. Michal Shamir & John L. Sullivan, 1985. "Jews and Arabs in Israel," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(2), pages 283-305, June.
    13. Seth C. McKee & Antoine Yoshinaka, 2021. "Profiles in party switching: The case of Southern Party activists," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(4), pages 1615-1637, July.
    14. Wayne Eastman & Deirdre Collier, 2012. "The Optimal Bargain between the Elite and the Majority: Party and Managerial Ideologies as Devices to Control Politicians and Managers," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 475-494, July.
    15. Hortala-Vallve, Rafael & Esteve-Volart, Berta, 2011. "Voter turnout and electoral competition in a multidimensional policy space," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 376-384, June.
    16. Alexandra L. Cooper, 2002. "The Effective Length of the Presidential Primary Season," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 71-92, January.
    17. Moshe Maor, 1995. "Intra-Party Determinants of Coalition Bargaining," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(1), pages 65-91, January.
    18. James M. Snyder, 1994. "Safe Seats, Marginal Seats, And Party Platforms: The Logic Of Platform Differentiation," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 201-213, November.
    19. Andre Blais, 1974. "Power and causality," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 45-63, March.
    20. Fiachra Kennedy & Pat Lyons & Peter Fitzgerald, 2006. "Pragmatists, Ideologues and the General Law of Curvilinear Disparity: The Case of the Irish Labour Party," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(4), pages 786-805, December.

    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:spr:qualqt:v:35:y:2001:i:3:p:325-341. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.