000			01448pab a2200169 454500
008			180718b2000 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aBollen, Kenneth A.
245			_aSubjective measures of liberal democracy
260			_c2000
300			_ap.58-86
362			_aFeb
520			_aUsing democracy in empirical work requires accurate measurement. Yet, most policy and academic research presupposes the accuracy of available measures. This article explores judge-specific measurement errors in cros-national indicators of liberal democracy. The authors evaluate the magnitude of these errors in widely used measures of democracy and determine whether their results replicate during a 17-year period (1972 to 1988). Then, they examine the nature of these systematic errors, hypothesizing that three different processes - (a) the information available for rating, (b) the judges' processing of this information, and (c) the method by which a judge's processing decisions are translated into a rating - could create error. The authors find that for the 17-year period from 1972 to 1988, there is unambiguous evidence of judge-specific measurement errors, which are related to traits of the countries. In the conclusion, the authors discuss the implications for democracy research and for other subjective measures. - Reproduced
650			_aLiberalism
700			_aPaxton, Pamela
773			_aComparative Political Studies
909			_a44000
999			_c44000 _d44000