This makes me think of a paper we never got published- poli sci journals hated it-- with a lot of methodology you'd fine useful, since the math problem is exactly the same as finding the best short IQ test for measuring g. In our case, we wanted to find the best N questions for measuring conservative-liberal, for N= 1,...10. At minimum, you should discover the best ONE-ITEM IQ test, which would be a very fun result.
Voter Ideology: Regression Measurement of Position on the
Left-Right Spectrum
June 28, 2016
J. Mark Ramseyer and Eric B. Rasmusen
Abstract
For scholars who need a measure of political preferences, a person’s position on the ideological
spectrum provides a good start. Typically, scholars identify that position through factor analysis on
survey questions. In effect, they assume that the calculated synthetic variable marks the person’s location
on the liberal-conservative spectrum. They then use that ideology variable either as the focus of a study
on ideology, or as a control variable in other regressions. The leading attitudinal surveys— the GSS, the
CCES, and the ANES— include a variable giving a respondent’s self-identified ideology. Factor analysis
assigns this variable no special prominence. To treat this self-identification appropriately, we urge
scholars to instead measure ideology using the fitted value from a regression of self-identified ideology on
other survey responses. In contrast to factor analysis, the regression approach assigns proper priority to
self-identification; it lets us test whether voters identify their own ideology through identity-group
variables; it avoids the bias introduced in choosing the issue variables to include in the factor analysis;
Interesting approach. The main issue with this idea, maybe, is that the regression models would not be consistent across time. Issues will change their importance in determining self-perceptions. Trying to apply the model over decades, then, probably results in non-invariance and strange results. Something you could look into by fitting your model in the different decades and cross-validating across.
> At minimum, you should discover the best ONE-ITEM IQ test, which would be a very fun result.
There can't be a best one-item IQ test. In the absence of any measurement error of any kind (which wouldn't occur even under many idealizing assumptions), the most you can do with a one-item test is classify people into two groups, above a threshold and below a threshold.
That might be enough for you, but where you want the threshold to be will vary depending on what you're trying to accomplish.
"There is another aspect to measuring intelligence, which is that to measure intelligence well, you need to use multiple different kinds of items. This is because every item (or test of items) measures intelligence in addition to one or more other abilities."
Yes, some finer aspects of intelligence are missed when an intelligence test is shortened.
"Universities are these days obsessed with keeping everybody enrolled (🤑), this might make the correlation weaker."
True, as with most aspects of our society, avariciousness reigns supreme.
No matter how you slice and dice it blacks are substantially less intelligent than whites or Asians..... you can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic as many times as you want it's not going to change the outcome.
This makes me think of a paper we never got published- poli sci journals hated it-- with a lot of methodology you'd fine useful, since the math problem is exactly the same as finding the best short IQ test for measuring g. In our case, we wanted to find the best N questions for measuring conservative-liberal, for N= 1,...10. At minimum, you should discover the best ONE-ITEM IQ test, which would be a very fun result.
Voter Ideology: Regression Measurement of Position on the
Left-Right Spectrum
June 28, 2016
J. Mark Ramseyer and Eric B. Rasmusen
Abstract
For scholars who need a measure of political preferences, a person’s position on the ideological
spectrum provides a good start. Typically, scholars identify that position through factor analysis on
survey questions. In effect, they assume that the calculated synthetic variable marks the person’s location
on the liberal-conservative spectrum. They then use that ideology variable either as the focus of a study
on ideology, or as a control variable in other regressions. The leading attitudinal surveys— the GSS, the
CCES, and the ANES— include a variable giving a respondent’s self-identified ideology. Factor analysis
assigns this variable no special prominence. To treat this self-identification appropriately, we urge
scholars to instead measure ideology using the fitted value from a regression of self-identified ideology on
other survey responses. In contrast to factor analysis, the regression approach assigns proper priority to
self-identification; it lets us test whether voters identify their own ideology through identity-group
variables; it avoids the bias introduced in choosing the issue variables to include in the factor analysis;
and it identifies the issues that the average voter thinks best define “liberal” and “conservative.” http://rasmusen.org/papers/spectrum-ramseyer-rasmusen.pdf.
Interesting approach. The main issue with this idea, maybe, is that the regression models would not be consistent across time. Issues will change their importance in determining self-perceptions. Trying to apply the model over decades, then, probably results in non-invariance and strange results. Something you could look into by fitting your model in the different decades and cross-validating across.
> At minimum, you should discover the best ONE-ITEM IQ test, which would be a very fun result.
There can't be a best one-item IQ test. In the absence of any measurement error of any kind (which wouldn't occur even under many idealizing assumptions), the most you can do with a one-item test is classify people into two groups, above a threshold and below a threshold.
That might be enough for you, but where you want the threshold to be will vary depending on what you're trying to accomplish.
Black people are now regretting that they invented testing.
American University's researched this highly at the turn of the 20th century and nothing has changed.
Blacks are substantially less intelligent...... we all know this it's a law of science essentially now.
Could somebody do #9 for me?
"Dividing the profits equally means each person gets 1/3 of them...$1600.
I wonder what the r is/would be with longer IQ tests of more established validity?
You can just adjust for the reliability and do the same for the others, and the validity should be roughly the same.
Nothing would change.
"There is another aspect to measuring intelligence, which is that to measure intelligence well, you need to use multiple different kinds of items. This is because every item (or test of items) measures intelligence in addition to one or more other abilities."
Yes, some finer aspects of intelligence are missed when an intelligence test is shortened.
"Universities are these days obsessed with keeping everybody enrolled (🤑), this might make the correlation weaker."
True, as with most aspects of our society, avariciousness reigns supreme.
Thanks for the analysis.
No matter how you slice and dice it blacks are substantially less intelligent than whites or Asians..... you can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic as many times as you want it's not going to change the outcome.
An there races 2.