Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Sociological Methods & Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ZAX, J. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Comment on "Estimating the Extent of Racially Polarized Voting in Multicandidate Contests" by Bernard Grofman and Michael Migalski

JEFFREY S. ZAX

University of Colorado at Boulder

Double regression figures prominently in the analysis of racially polarized voting. Grofman and Migalski attempt three extensions of this technique: the application to multimember districts, the calculation of standard errors for the parameters of interest, and validation through comparisons with seemingly unrelated regression (SUR). All three extensions fail. The first is based on an arithmetical error. The second is based on an incomplete specification of the underlying statistical model. The third is based on a mistaken application of SUR in a context in which it is guaranteed to yield the same results as the ordinary least squares estimates of double regression.

Sociological Methods & Research, Vol. 31, No. 1, 75-86 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0049124102031001003
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Sociological Methods ResearchHome page
B. Grofman and M. A. Barreto
A Reply to Zax's (2002) Critique of Grofman and Migalski (1988): Double-Equation Approaches to Ecological Inference When the Independent Variable Is Misspecified
Sociological Methods Research, May 1, 2009; 37(4): 599 - 617.
[Abstract] [PDF]