In recent years political scientists have become increasingly sensitive to questions of conditional dependence in their data. I outline and compare two general, widely-used approaches for addressing such dependence—robust variance estimators and generalized estimating equations (GEEs)—using data on votes in Supreme Court search and seizure decisions between 1963 and 1981. The results make clear that choices about the unit on which data are grouped, i.e., clustered, are typically of far greater significance than are decisions about which type estimator is used.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albert, Paul S., and Lisa M. McShane. 1995. “A Generalized Estimating Equations Approach for Spatially Correlated Binary Data: Applications to the Analysis of Neuroimaging Data.”Bio-metrics51 (June): 627-638.
2.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz. 1995. “What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data.”American Political Science Review89 (September): 634-647.
3.
Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan N. Katz. 1996. “Nuisance vs. Substance: Specifying and Estimating Time-Series Cross-Section Models.”Political Analysis6 (1): 1-36.
4.
Diggle, Peter J., Kung-Yee Liang, and Scott L. Zeger. 1994. Analysis of Longitudinal Data. New York: Oxford University Press.
5.
Eicker, F.1963. “Asymptotic Normality and Consistency of the Least Squares Estimators for Families of Linear Regressions.”Annals of Mathematical Statistics34 (2): 447-456.
6.
Epstein, Lee, and Carol Mershon. 1996. “Measuring Political Preferences.”American Journal of Political Science40 (February): 261-294.
7.
Gill, Jeff. 1999. “The Insignificance of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing.”Political Research Quarterly52 (September): 647-674.
8.
Hojnacki, Marie, and David C. Kimball. 1998. “Organized Interests and the Decision of Whom to Lobby in Congress.”American Political Science Review92 (December): 775-790.
9.
Hsaio, Cheng. 2003. Analysis of Panel Data, 2nd ed.New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Huber, P. J.1967. “The Behavior of Maximum Likelihood Estimates under Non-Standard Assumptions.”Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability1 (1): 221-233.
11.
King, Gary. 2001. “Proper Nouns and Methodological Propriety: Pooling Dyads in International Relations Data.”International Organization55 (Spring): 497-507.
12.
King, Gary. 1989. Unifying Politial Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Liang, Kung-Yee, and Scott L. Zeger. 1986. “Longitudinal Data Analysis Using Generalized Linear Models.”Biometrika73 (1): 13-22.
14.
Liang, Kung-Yee, Scott L. Zeger, and B. Qaqish. 1992. “Multivariate Regression Analyses for Categorical Data (with Discussion).”Journal of the Royal Statistical Society54 (1): 3-40.
15.
Long, J. Scott, and Laurie H. Ervin. 2000. “Using Heteroscedasticity Consistent Standard Errors in the Linear Regression Model.”American Statistician54 (August): 217-224.
16.
Mackinnon, J. G., and H. White. 1985. “Some Heteroskedasticity Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimators with Improved Finite Sample Properties.”Journal of Econometrics29 (1): 53-57.
17.
McCullagh, Peter. 2004. Exchangeability and Regression Models. Working paper: Department of Statistics, University of Chicago.
18.
McCullagh, Peter, and J. A. Nelder. 1989. Generalized Linear Models, 2nd ed.London: Chapman and Hall.
19.
Mugglestone, M. A., M. G. Kenward, and S. J. Clark. 2002. “Generalized Estimating Equations for Spatially Referenced Binary Data.” In Dario Gregori, Gaetano Carmeci, Herwig Friedl, Anuska Ferligoj, and Attilio Wedlin, eds., Correlated Data Modeling: Proceedings, Trieste 1999, pp.121-130. Milan: FrancoAngeli S.R.L.
20.
Neuhaus, J. M., J. D. Kalbfleisch, and W. W. Hauck. 1991. “A Comparison of Cluster-Specific and Population-Averaged Approaches for Analyzing Correlated Binary Data.”International Statistical Review59: 25-35.
21.
Oneal, John R., and Bruce Russett. 1999. “The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885-1992.”World Politics52 (October): 1-37.
22.
Segal, Jeffrey A.1986. “Supreme Court Justices as Human Decision Makers: An Individual-Level Analysis of the Search and Seizure Cases.”Journal of Politics47 (November): 938-955.
23.
Segal, Jeffrey A., and Albert D. Cover. 1989. “Ideological Values and the Votes of U.S. Supreme Court Justices.”American Political Science Review83 (June): 557-565.
24.
Spaeth, Harold J., and Michael F. Altfield. 1985. “Influence Relationships Within the Supreme Court: A Comparison of the Warren and Burger Courts.”Western Political Quarterly37 (March): 70-83.
25.
Stimson, James A.1985. “Regression in Time and Space: A Statistical Essay.”American Journal of Political Science29 (November): 914-947.
26.
Wawro, Gregory. 2001. “A Panel Probit Analysis of Campaign Contributions and Roll Call Votes.”American Journal of Political Science45 (July): 563-579.
27.
Wawro, Gregory, and Sean Farhang. 2004. “Institutional Dynamics on the U.S. Court of Appeals: Minority Representation Under Panel Decision-Making.”Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization20 (September): 299-330.
28.
White, Halbert. 1980. “A Heteroscedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix and a Direct Test for Heteroscedasticity.”Econometrica48: 817-838.
29.
Williams, R. L.2000. “A Note on Robust Variance Estimation for Cluster-Correlated Data.”Biometrics56: 645-646.
30.
Zeger, Scott L., and Kung-Yee Liang. 1986. “Longitudinal Data Analysis for Discrete and Continuous Outcomes.”Biometrics42 (1): 121-130.
31.
Ziegler, Andreas, Christian Kastner, and Maria Blettner. 1998. “Generalised Estimating Equations: An Annotated Bibliography.”Biometrical Journal40 (2): 115-139.
32.
Zorn, Christopher. 2001a. “Estimating Between- and Within-Cluster Covariate Effects, with an Application to Models of International Disputes.” 2001. International Interactions27 (4): 433-445.
33.
Zorn, Christopher. 2001b. “Generalized Estimating Equation Models for Correlated Data: A Review with Applications.”American Journal of Political Science45 (April): 470-490.
