This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Baodong Liu, Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

EI Extended Model and the Fear of Ecological Fallacy

University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh

Most existing models of ecological inference are based on the assumption that there is no aggregation bias. Few studies have focused on how to correct/ model aggregation bias. This article takes advantage of a unique opportunity to compare the controversial ecological inference methods by using aggregate as well as individual-level data from an actual election. Furthermore, the true quantities of interest are also available, which guarantees the accuracy of the empirical tests. Our mean squared error analyses show that King's Ecological Inference (EI) basic model does not always outperform the traditional ecological regression and neighborhood methods when aggregation bias does exist. However, using an appropriate covariate in the King's EI extended model to correct the aggregation bias problem can drastically improve the estimation accuracy at both the precinct and district levels. This article also makes suggestions on how to use a covariate in a King's extended model.

Key Words: EI • ecological fallacy • ecological inferences • aggregation bias • contextual effect

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?