Welcome Banner


The Society for Political Methodology is the world's premier academic organization for quantitative political science, addressing the needs of a global membership base united in developing and establishing empirical tools for the study of politics.

Recent and Upcoming Conferences

Dates Conference Host/Location
Jan. 6-7, 2022 Asian Polmeth IX Online
Nov. 19-20, 2021 V LAPolMeth 2021 ITAM, Mexico City
July 13-16, 2021 PolMeth XXXVIII NYU (Online)
May 7, 2021 SLAMM XIV WUSTL (Online)
March 17-19, 2021 I PolMeth Europe Hamburg (Online)

Recent Papers

Taking Ballots Seriously: Heterogeneous Ballot Compositions and Vote Choice
Mauerer, Ingrid, and Annemarie Walter. Working Paper. “Taking Ballots Seriously: Heterogeneous Ballot Compositions and Vote Choice”. Abstract
In partially-contested multiparty elections, voters are confronted with different party choices, depending on their constituency. We present a computationally straightforward modeling approach that systematically integrates heterogeneous ballot compositions, which classical models neglect, into the voter utility functions. We illustrate the benefits of the approach in studying British spatial voting behavior, where previous studies tend to simplify the actual choice situation by modeling a single ballot composition, thereby ignoring a substantial part of the electorate. Using 2015 British Election Study data, we simultaneously consider up to seven parties, spread across eight unique ballots, and provide a fully-specified vote model. The results show that both spatial and tactical considerations depend on which party voters evaluate. Whereas spatial proximity substantially impacts voting for the large parties, we uncover the reversed pattern for tactical considerations. These party-specific effects are not found when neglecting ballot composition heterogeneity.
Ends Against the Middle: Scaling Votes When Ideological Opposites Behave the Same for Antithetical Reasons

Standard methods for measuring ideology from voting records assume that individuals at the ideological ends should never vote together in opposition to moderates. In practice, however, there are many times when individuals from both extremes vote identically but for opposing reasons. Both liberal and conservative justices may dissent from the same Supreme Court decision but provide ideologically contradictory rationales. In legislative settings, ideological opposites may join together to oppose moderate legislation in pursuit of antithetical goals. We introduce a scaling model that accommodates ends against the middle voting and provide a novel estimation approach that improves upon existing routines. We apply this method to voting data from the United States Supreme Court and Congress and show it outperforms standard methods in terms of both congruence with qualitative insights and model fit. We argue our proposed method represents a superior default approach for generating one-dimensional ideological estimates in many important settings.

Considerations for Machine Learning Use in Political Research with Application to Voter Turnout
Moses, Laura, and Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier. Working Paper. “Considerations for Machine Learning Use in Political Research with Application to Voter Turnout”. Abstract

Machine learning is becoming increasingly prevalent in political science research. Improving the accuracy of outcomes, refining measurements of complex processes, addressing non-linearities in data and introducing new kinds of data may be achieved using machine learning. Despite the possible uses of machine learning, a clear understanding of how to use these tools and their pitfalls is still needed. This article provides a foundational guide to machine learning and illustrates how these methods can advance political science research. We address the pitfalls of these methods as well as the specific concerns for using machine learning with social data. Finally, we demonstrate how machine learning can help understand voter turnout through an application of methods with survey data on the 2016 election.

Knowledge Decays: Temporal Validity and Social Science in a Changing World

The "credibility revolution" has forced social scientists to confront the limits of our methods for creating general knowledge. The current approach aims to aggregate valid but local knowledge. At the same time, the increasing centrality of the internet to political and social processes has rendered untenable the implicit ceteris paribus assumptions necessary for aggregating knowledge produced at dierent times. The interaction of these two trends is not yet well understood. I argue that a high rate of change of the objects of our study makes "knowledge decay" a potentially large source of error. "Temporal validity" is a form of external validity in which the target setting is in the future|which, of course, is always the case. A crucial distinction between cross-sectional external validity and temporal validity is that the latter implies a fundamental incompleteness of social science that renders the project of non-parametric knowledge aggregation impossible. I discuss the limitations of extant strategies for knowledge aggregation through the lens of temporal validity, and propose strategies for improving practice.

All (Mayoral) Politics is Local?
Sinclair, Betsy, et al. Working Paper. “All (Mayoral) Politics is Local?”. Abstract

One of the defining characteristics of modern politics in the United States is the increasing nationalization of elite- and voter-level behavior. Relying on measures of electoral vote shares, previous research has found evidence indicating a significant amount of state-level nationalization. Using an alternative source of data -- the political rhetoric used by mayors, state governors, and Members of Congress on Twitter -- we examine and compare the amount of between-office nationalization throughout the federal system. We find that gubernatorial rhetoric closely matches that of Members of Congress but that there are substantial differences in the topics and content of mayoral speech. These results suggest that, on average, American mayors have largely remained focused on their local mandate. More broadly, our findings suggest a limit to which American politics has become nationalized -- in some cases, all politics remains local.


Join us

Joining the Society for Political Methodology gives you access to the political methodology community, including access to Political Analysis, The Political Methodologist, discounts on Cambridge University Press products, course syllabi, and more.



Subscribe to our Mailing List

The POLMETH listserv is the official mailing list of the Society, which serves as a forum to discuss methodological challenges and circulate announcements of opportunities.


Paper Server

Upload a Paper

The PolMeth Paper Archive is a repository for high-quality working papers relating to political methodology. Papers are free to upload and free to read. Anyone can upload a paper, pending approval from the Website Editor.