The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Congress: The Electoral Connection
Abstract
Dataset for David R. Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection, 2nd ed. (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004 (first ed. 1974). Includes histograms for “vanishing marginals” exhibited at pp. 54-60 in David R. Mayhew, Parties and Policies: How the American Government Works (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Grimmer (2012) shows that several of the topics identify press releases that are claiming credit for money directed to the district.
“Grimmer (2012) shows that several of the topics identify press releases that are claiming credit for money directed to the district (Mayhew 1974) (the differences across topics capture differences in the type of money claimed).”
From Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts (2013) · cites this paper as Mayhew 1974
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts
Grimmer, J., & Stewart, B. M. (2013) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mps028 · Cited by 3,297
Metadata
- Authors
- Mayhew, D.
- Affiliations
- Yale University
- Venue
- Yale Dataverse
- Publisher
- Yale Dataverse
- Published
- 1974
- References
- 0
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
