| ID | 134793 |
| Title Proper | Congressional election forecasting |
| Other Title Information | structure-x models for 2014 |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Lewis-Beck, Michael S ; Tien, Charles |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | In the United States, election forecasting has expanded from First Generation to Second Generation approaches. 1 The First Generation took hold in the early 1980s, and was dominated by a battle between structural modelers and pollsters (and to a lesser extent, the markets). The Second Generation, which had sunk deep roots by the 2012 presidential election, was dominated by Structuralists, Aggregators, Synthesizers, and Experts (as labeled by Lewis-Beck and Stegmaier 2014). The Structuralists continued in the tradition of issuing forecasts from static, single-equation explanatory models (e.g., Abramowitz 2014, Campbell 2014). The Aggregators departed from reliance on the polls of individual leading houses, instead freely combining many polls to come up with averaged, and dynamic, forecasts (e.g., Real Clear Politics). The Synthesizers joined structural models and poll aggregates to provide changing forecasts as Election Day approached (e.g., Erikson and Wlezien 2014; Linzer 2014). In contrast to this, The Experts, or Judges looked at whatever information they considered relevant, quantitative or not, arriving at forecasts shaped by current data and intuition (e.g., Cook and Wasserman 2014; Rothenberg 2014). |
| `In' analytical Note | Political Science and Politics Vol.47, No.4; Oct.2014: p.782-785 |
| Journal Source | Political Science and Politics 2014-12 47, 4 |
| Standard Number | United States – US |