NYU Politics Data Center

18th Annual Northeast Political Methodology Meeting at NYU

Registration closes Friday, May 3, 2019.


All events take place at the NYU Politics Department, Room 217.

19 W 4th Street, 2nd Floor (Get Google Maps directions here)

(Corner of W 4th Street and Mercer Street)


Friday, May 3, 2019


11:30 - 12:30:  Lunch


12:30 - 02:00:  Adam Bonica

 Dept of Political Science, Stanford

 " Inferring Candidates’ Issue-Specific Positions from Itemized Campaign Contributions Using Supervised Machine Learning."

                          [Abstract]The Supreme Court has consistently upheld campaign finance disclosure as an important means to help voters place candidates on the political spectrum “more precisely than is often possible solely on the basis of party labels and campaign speeches” (Buckley v. Valeo). To test the informational value from disclosure, we train supervised machine learning models on all itemized donations made to candidates to predict how they vote on a given policy domain (e.g., immigration) as measured by interest group ratings. Our supervised models better predict candidates’ issue-specific positions than DW-NOMINATE scores. In addition, we identify specific donors that best signal candidates’ positions in each policy domain. Going forward, we will demonstrate that our supervised models can predict nonincumbents’ issue-specific positions before they have accumulated any legislative records, and we will also assess how trends in polarization have affected issue alignments both across and within parties over time. [Paper]


02:15 - 03:45:  Chris Warshaw

 Dept of Political Science, George Washington University

 "Electoral Accountability for Ideological Extremism in American Elections"

                          [Abstract]Do voters hold candidates accountable for their ideological positions? Past work on this topic has focused almost exclusively on U.S. House elections. It typically finds that candidates pay an electoral penalty for ideological extremity. In this paper, we extend the study of accountability to a far wider range of offices. We use roll call voting and campaign finance receipts to measure ideological extremism and a difference-in-difference identification strategy to examine accountability across five different offices: U.S. House, U.S. Senate, governor, state house, and state senate. In every office, ideologically extreme candidates pay a penalty at the ballot But we find significant variation in the penalty for extremism across offices. The smallest penalty for extremism is in state house elections, where voters barely punish extremists, and the largest penalty is in gubernatorial elections, where candidates receive a 7-8\% increase in vote share by moving halfway across the range of ideological positions in their party. Our results have implications for literatures on representation, accountability, congress, and state politics. [Paper]


04:00 - 05:30:  John Londregan

 Dept of Politics, Princeton University

 "Chile's Popular Unity Government in the Headlines"

                          [Abstract]We analyze newspaper headlines from two crucial junctures during Chile’s Popular Unity (UP) Gov- ernment, the 1972 truck driver’s strike and the 1973 debate over establishing a Unified National School (ENU). We find a one dimensional spatial structure in which the newspapers were highly polarized using an ideologically charged vocabulary. Sparse Factor Analysis (SFA) reveals strong evidence in favor of a single dimension, while WordFish provides similar results with regards to the structure of that dimension.[Paper]


05:30 - 06:30:  Post Papers Discussion Event


06:45               Dinner for Speakers and Invited Faculty Guests

For more information, please contact Jonathan Nagler

Previous NEMP Editions

  • NEMP 2017
  • NEMP 2016
  • NEMP 2015
  • NEMP 2014
  • NEMP 2013
  • NEMP 2012
  • NEMP 2011
  • NEMP 2010