Theory and Methods in the Study of Distributive Politics

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 629-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Albertus

While many scholars have moved toward using individual-level data to test theories of distributive politics, no studies have ever explicitly examined differences between individual and aggregate analyses of a distributive program. By leveraging nationwide individual-level data on both revealed voter preferences and the actual receipt of particularistic benefits through a contemporary Venezuelan land reform initiative, this article demonstrates that scholars can most effectively test and refine individual-level theories of distributive politics by combining both individual- and macro-level data. There are at least two advantages to doing so. First, comparing and contrasting findings from data at different levels of analysis can enable researchers to paint a more complete picture of distributive targeting. Second, when distributive benefits can be impacted or redirected by subnational politicians, as is common with many distributive programs, individual-level data alone can generate mistaken inferences that are an artifact of competing targeting attempts at different levels of government instead of initial targeting strategies. I demonstrate both of these points and discuss practical and simple recommendations regarding data collection strategies for the purposes of effectively testing theories of distributive politics.

Author(s):  
Mauro Caprioli ◽  
Claire Dupuy

This chapter studies levels of analysis. Research in the social sciences may be interested in subjects located at different levels of analysis. The level of analysis indicates the position at which social and political phenomena are analysed within a gradual order of abstraction or aggregation that is constructed analytically. Its definition and boundaries vary across social science disciplines. In general, the micro level refers to the individual level and focuses on citizens’ attitudes or politicians’ and diplomats’ behaviour. Analyses at the meso level focus on groups and organizations, like political parties, social movements, and public administrations. The macro level corresponds to structures that are national, social, economic, cultural, or institutional — for example, countries and national or supranational political regimes. The explanandum (what research aims to account for), the explanans (the explanations), the unit of analysis, and data collection can be located at different levels. The chapter then considers two main errors commonly associated with aggregation and levels of analysis: ecological and atomistic fallacies.


1991 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
PER SELLE ◽  
LARS SVÅSAND

This article questions assumptions in the literature dealing with party decline. First, European aggregate membership data do not support a general conclusion of party decline. Second, individual-level data for Norway demonstrate the complexities of the relationship between membership, party identification, activity in parties, and membership stability. Third, we discuss societal changes commonly associated with party decline, such as the rise of corporatism, the new political movements, and the rise of the electronic media. The aurthors argue that these developments change the structural position of parties (external) and the relationship between different levels of the party organization itself (internal). While such developments may lead to party decline, they also give party organizations new political maneuverability. Furthermore, the growth of new parties, the politicization of new arenas, and the nationalization of party apparatuses counteract the factors associated with party decline.


Author(s):  
Ana Caetano

The main goal of this paper is to present a theoretical proposal for the empirical analysis of personal reflexivity. Considering the challenges posed by the study of reflexivity, the contributions of different authors from sociology are discussed. A model for the analysis of the reflexive processes at the individual level is then proposed, based on the articulation between elements of critical realism and propositions fromdispositionalist theory and structuration theory. This model distinguishes internal and external dimensions of action and it is structured around different levels of analysis.


2022 ◽  
pp. 146879412110651
Author(s):  
Jari Martikainen ◽  
Eemeli Hakoköngäs

This paper explores the possibilities of drawing as a method of researching social representations. The theory of social representations focuses on studying the forms, contents, and functions of socially shared common knowledge. In this paper, we (1) present the central premises of social representations theory, (2) elaborate drawing as a visual research method, and (3) synthesize how the drawing method may promote and diversify our understanding of social representations. We suggest that the drawing method is especially fruitful in the analysis of objectification process (how something abstract is made tangible); cognitive polyphasia (the idea of the simultaneous existence of diverse and contradicting social representations); and the different levels of analysis in which social representations become observable: ontogenesis (individual level), microgenesis (social interaction level), and sociogenesis (societal level). Through these insights, this paper advances the current understanding of the drawing method in qualitative social representations research.


1993 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Candace Kruttschnitt

Drawing from different kinds and levels of analysis, this article synthesizes current knowledge on women’s violent offending and victimization cross-nationally. Individual-level data indicate characteristics and situations that put women at risk for violence within particular countries. Aggregate-level data concentrate on women’s risks of violent encounters across nations and the societal-level factors that are associated with these risks. This multinational, multilevel approach reveals substantial gaps between our understanding of the types of encounters in which women are at greatest risk for violence and the societal correlates that predict gender distributions in violence across nations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Browning ◽  
Nicolo P. Pinchak ◽  
Catherine A. Calder

This review outlines approaches to explanations of crime that incorporate the concept of human mobility—or the patterns of movement throughout space of individuals or populations in the context of everyday routines—with a focus on novel strategies for the collection of geographically referenced data on mobility patterns. We identify three approaches to understanding mobility–crime linkages: Place and neighborhood approaches characterize local spatial units of analysis of varying size with respect to the intersection in space and time of potential offenders, victims, and guardians. Person-centered approaches emphasize the spatial trajectories of individuals and person–place interactions that influence crime risk. Ecological network approaches consider links between persons or collectivities based on shared activity locations, capturing influences of broader systems of interconnection on spatial- and individual-level variation in crime. We review data collection strategies for the measurement of mobility across these approaches, considering both the challenges and promise of mobility-based research for criminology. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Criminology, Volume 4 is January 13, 2021. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Dolatshahi ◽  
Lara Maldjian ◽  
Alice Welch ◽  
Casey Fulmer ◽  
Emily Winkelstein

ObjectiveDescribe the development of an individual-level tracking system for community-based naloxone dispensing as part of New York City’s (NYC) comprehensive plan to reduce overdose deaths. We present data from the first year of the initiative to illustrate results of the tracking system and describe the potential impact on naloxone dispensing program.IntroductionThe number of unintentional overdose deaths in New York City (NYC) has increased for seven consecutive years. In 2017, there were 1,487 unintentional drug overdose deaths in NYC. Over 80% of these deaths involved an opioid, including heroin, fentanyl, and prescription pain relievers.1 As part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce overdose mortality in NYC, the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene’s (DOHMH) Overdose Education and Naloxone Distribution (OEND) Program makes naloxone kits available to laypeople free-of-charge through registered Opioid Overdose Prevention Programs (OOPPs). Naloxone kits contain two doses of naloxone and educational materials. The OEND Program distributes kits to registered OOPPs, which then dispense kits to individuals via community-based trainings. In this context, distribution refers to kits shipped to programs, whereas dispensing refers to kits given to individuals. Increased NYC funding has enabled recruitment of more OOPPs—including syringe exchange programs, public safety agencies, shelters, drug treatment programs, health care facilities, and other community-based programs—and greater dispensing of naloxone kits to laypeople. Naloxone distribution has undergone a dramatic expansion, from 2,500 kits in 2009 to 61,706 kits in 2017.2 In 2018, DOHMH aims to distribute more than 100,000 kits to OOPPs.In order to target naloxone dispensing to neighborhoods in NYC with the highest overdose burden, we developed a tracking system able to capture individual-level geographic data about naloxone kit recipients. Prior to the development of the tracking system, DOHMH collected quarterly, aggregate-level naloxone dispensing data from OOPPs. These data included only the OOPPs’ ZIP Codes but not recipient residence. OOPP ZIP Code was used as a proxy for kits dispensed to individuals. Without individual-level geographic information, however, we could not determine whether naloxone kit dispensing reached people in neighborhoods with high overdose mortality rates. To overcome these barriers, DOHMH developed a comprehensive but flexible individual-level data collection method.MethodsTo both capture individual-level data from each naloxone recipient in NYC and meet the needs of OOPPs’ varying capacities, dispensing settings, and any existing organizational data requirements, DOHMH devised a two-pronged data collection system. The Naloxone Recipient Form (NRF) system, launched January 1, 2018, primarily employs a short paper form (or NRF) to collect dispensing data. The NRF is a one-page document designed with the OpenText™ TeleForm processing application. It captures individual data and OOPP information. Individual data include: reason for obtaining a kit, whether first-time receipt of a kit, age, and ZIP Code of residence. OOPP information includes: program name and ZIP Code of dispensing location. Forms are completed by OOPPs and recipients at OEND trainings, compiled by the OOPP, then scanned back to DOHMH. We then import forms into TeleForm, which reads the NRF data directly into a database without need for manual data entry and only moderate need for data verification. The second component of the NRF system allows larger organizations and dispensers in clinical settings with electronic health records to submit data extracts to DOHMH that are pulled directly from organizations’ data systems. Together with these organizations, we customized these data extracts for direct importation into the master NRF database.To demonstrate improvements in our tracking of naloxone dispensing after the development of the NRF system, we mapped the geographic spread of naloxone kits in NYC during the first three months of 2018 (Q1 2018) by recipients’ ZIP Code of residence and OOPPs’ ZIP Codes.ResultsA total of 138 OOPPs2 reported any dispensing from January to June, 2018, of which 107 reported individual-level data using the NRF system, accounting for 27,899 kits dispensed to 23,610 individual recipients.3 Logistical barriers to implementing the NRF system varied among OOPPs, thus the data underestimate citywide dispensing during this time period. Some OOPPs experienced delays in reporting recipient-level data until a more-tailored data collection strategy was devised. Visual inspection of OOPP-level distribution and individual-level dispensing maps using Q1 2018 data (See Figures 1 and 2) demonstrate the difference between OOPP-level distribution data and individual-level dispensing data. Mapping data indicate that the largest numbers of naloxone kits were dispensed to people in neighborhoods with the highest burden of overdose in NYC.ConclusionsThe NRF system provides DOHMH, as well as OOPPs in NYC, with individual-level data to more accurately track naloxone dispensing citywide. The simplicity and flexibility of the NRF system allows for timely and geographically precise data collection from dozens of organizations across NYC with little or no additional cost to OOPPs. As new organizations have registered as OOPPs, particularly large health care or human services systems, DOHMH has developed new methods for incorporating dispensing data into the NRF system. Ongoing communication with OOPPs of all types and an iterative data collection improvement process have ensured that the system remains comprehensive while also being responsive to individual program’s capacities and data needs.References1. Nolan ML, Tuazon E, Blachman-Forshay J, Paone D. Unintentional Drug Poisoning (Overdose) Deaths in New York City, 2000-2017. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene: Epi Data Brief (104); September 2018.2. NYC DOHMH Opioid Overdose Prevention Program (OOPP) Database. All data is provisional.3. NYC DOHMH Naloxone Recipient Form (NRF) Database. All data is provisional. 


2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (4) ◽  
pp. iii-ix

Issue 4 of Volume 107 closes our first full year at the helm of the Review. We are very grateful for all of the support we have received from our colleagues in the discipline, and we are particularly thankful to everyone who submitted work to the review and to those who agreed to act as referees. We are also happy to present this final issue of the year, which includes pieces that touch on the following fundamental questions facing our discipline. How does one reconcile the tension between different levels of analysis, between holism and individualism? What better explains attitudes towards gender equality: individual-level characteristics or national political contexts? Does city size translate into greater political clout? Does experience with violence shape individual attitudes toward combatants in a civil war? Do resource rents really explain the lack of democratic accountability? How do past patterns of economic interaction explain current levels of interethnic cooperation? And what is the future of multiculturalism? These questions are only some of the issues tackled by the articles in this issue. As with any good work, the pieces in this issue of the Review should raise even more questions—and this is exactly what we believe our discipline needs, provocative articles that stimulate exciting new lines of research.


2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Michael McGregor ◽  
Aaron A. Moore ◽  
Laura B. Stephenson

AbstractVoting behaviour in municipal elections is understudied in Canada. Existing research is limited by the type of data (aggregate instead of individual-level) and the cases evaluated (partisan when most contests are non-partisan). The objective of this study is to contribute to this literature by using individual-level data about a non-partisan election. To do so, we use data from the Toronto Election Study, conducted during the 2014 election. Our research goals are to evaluate whether a standard approach to understanding vote choice (the multi-stage explanatory model) is applicable in a non-partisan, municipal-level contest, and to determine the correlates of vote choice in the 2014 Toronto mayoral election in particular. Our analysis reveals that, although it was a formally non-partisan contest, voters tended to view the mayoral candidates in both ideological and partisan terms. We also find that a standard vote choice model provides valuable insight into voter preferences at the municipal level.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0160323X2110251
Author(s):  
William D. Hicks ◽  
Seth C. McKee

In this Field Note, we use precinct- and individual-level data on Pennsylvania to assess whether congressional redistricting influenced voter preferences in the 2018 midterm. Despite redistricting vastly altering the distribution of voters in House districts, this did little to change their preferences. Rather, redistricting contributed to Democratic House gains primarily by configuring a handful of districts to be more favorable to the Democratic Party. The evidence for minimal direct effects of redistricting on voter preferences, despite the presence of national political conditions breaking strongly in favor of Democrats, speaks to the increasing nationalization of American elections and with it, a concomitant decline in the incumbency advantage.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document