Reliability and validity of the 2002 and 2006 Chapel Hill expert surveys on party positioning
2010/02/02 by Liesbet Hooghe, Ryan Bakker, Anna Brigevich +10 · 496 citations
Business, Management and Accounting · Social Sciences · #Business #Chapel #Computer science #Data mining #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #European Union Policy and Governance #European union #Ideology #International trade #Law #Manifesto #Measure (data warehouse) #Political Influence and Corporate Strategies #Political science #Reliability (semiconductor)
paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009.01912.x
published in European Journal of Political Research 49(5), 687-703 (Wiley)
openalex publication_date 2010/02/02 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Abstract
Abstract This research note reports on the 2002 and 2006 Chapel Hill expert surveys (CHES), which measure national party positioning on European integration, ideology, and several European Union (EU) and non‐EU policies. The reliability of expert judgments is examined and the CHES data are cross‐validated with data from the Comparative Manifesto Project, the 2003 Benoit‐Laver expert survey and the 2002 Rohrschneider‐Whitefield survey. The dataset is available on the CHES website.
Cited by
- Do they know what they represent? Parliamentary candidates’ perceptions of their own party’s positions
- Measuring issue salience for political parties using LLMs
- Generations of pride? LGBTQ+ rights, sexuality, and voting behaviour in Spain
- CHES Canada
- Combining strengths of methods of party positioning to counter their weaknesses: the development of a new methodology to calibrate parties on issues and ideological dimensions
- Experts, coders and crowds: An analysis of substitutability
- Why accommodate? How niche pressure and intra-party divisions shape mainstream party strategies
- Validating LLMs in social science: Epistemic threats and emerging norms
- Dimensions of political conflict and party positions in multi-level democracies: evidence from the Local Manifesto Project
- Varieties of Radicalism: Examining the Diversity of Radical Left Parties and Voters in Western Europe
- Mapping (A)Ideology: A Taxonomy of European Parties Using Generative LLMs as Zero-Shot Learners
- Chapel Hill Expert Survey trend file, 1999–2019
- Nexit, Frexit or Grexit? A Comparison of Party and Citizen Positions Towards European Union Exit Referendums
- Party Systems, Democratic Positions, and Regime Changes: Introducing the Party-System Democracy Index
- More negative when it matters less? Comparing party campaign behaviour in European and national elections
- The power of prime ministers: evidence from 21 parliamentary democracies
- Validating Wordscores
- Can ChatGPT accurately identify the position of parties? A validation study with an expert survey in France
- An Improved Framework for Scaling Party Positions from Texts with Transformer
- A new left-conservative competitor in the German party system? The supporters of ‘Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht’ (BSW) and their ideological positions.
- Partisan attachments in a multidimensional space
- Are Voters Equal under Proportional Representation?
- Multilingual Sentiment Analysis: A New Approach to Measuring Conflict in Legislative Speeches
- Communism, Federalism, and Ethnic Minorities: Explaining Party Competition Patterns in Eastern Europe
- Ideological Talk, Strategic Vote: German Parties’ Positions on the Military Intervention in Afghanistan in Parliament
- Electric vehicle ownership and political preferences in Norway
- Citizens and Evaluation: A Review of Evaluation Models
- Who wins the British lavender vote? (Mostly) Labour
- Populists in Parliament: Comparing Left-Wing and Right-Wing Populism in the Netherlands
- A Results-Oriented Approach for the Animal Welfare Measure of the European Union's Rural Development Programme. [europepmc]
Related