|
|
|
|
Interest Group Ideology and Lobbying Partner Selection: Models and Evidence from Amicus Curiae Briefs |
|
| Abstract | Word Stems | Keywords | Association | Citation | Get this Document | Similar Titles |
|
STOP! You can now view the document associated with this citation by clicking on the "View Document as HTML" link below. |
|
Click here to view the document
|
Abstract:
|
Entering into coalitions has become a standard tactic for interest groups trying to maximize success while minimizing cost. The strategic conditions underlying decisions to form or join coalitions are beginning to be explored in the political science literature, yet very little is known about the process and criteria through which interest groups select coalition partners. In this paper, I explore the partner selection process by applying spatial theories of ideology and coalition formation to interest group participation on amicus curiae briefs. Previous work demonstrates that the lobbying efforts of groups can be used to generate a general measure of ideology for any group. These captured ideology scores are used in statistical models of interest group coalition partner selection on amicus curiae briefs from 1954-1985. This research demonstrates that the ideology scores captured for each group are powerful predictors of interest group coalition partner selection, even when controls for resources, group type, and other potential predictors are included. |
Most Common Document Word Stems:
group (168), coalit (137), interest (113), model (94), polit (55), brief (39), ideolog (38), amicus (38), variabl (37), zero (30), spatial (29), american (28), term (28), use (27), signific (27), organ (25), 1997 (25), court (24), case (23), scienc (23), univers (23), |
Author's Keywords:
|
interest groups, coalitions, count models, multidimensional scaling, spatial theory, lobbying, amicus curiae |
|
 | Convention | | Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote! |  | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. |  | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! |  | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! |  | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. |  | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! |  | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
Association:
Name: American Political Science Association URL: http://www.apsanet.org
|
Citation:
|
MLA Citation:
| Almeida, Richard. "Interest Group Ideology and Lobbying Partner Selection: Models and Evidence from Amicus Curiae Briefs" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2009-05-25 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42461_index.html> |
APA Citation:
| Almeida, R. A. , 2005-09-01 "Interest Group Ideology and Lobbying Partner Selection: Models and Evidence from Amicus Curiae Briefs" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-05-25 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p42461_index.html |
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Entering into coalitions has become a standard tactic for interest groups trying to maximize success while minimizing cost. The strategic conditions underlying decisions to form or join coalitions are beginning to be explored in the political science literature, yet very little is known about the process and criteria through which interest groups select coalition partners. In this paper, I explore the partner selection process by applying spatial theories of ideology and coalition formation to interest group participation on amicus curiae briefs. Previous work demonstrates that the lobbying efforts of groups can be used to generate a general measure of ideology for any group. These captured ideology scores are used in statistical models of interest group coalition partner selection on amicus curiae briefs from 1954-1985. This research demonstrates that the ideology scores captured for each group are powerful predictors of interest group coalition partner selection, even when controls for resources, group type, and other potential predictors are included. |
Get this Document:
Find this citation or document at one or all of these locations below. The links below may have the citation or the entire document for free or you may purchase access to the document. Clicking on these links will change the site you're on and empty your shopping cart.
| Document Type: |
application/pdf |
| Page count: |
32 |
| Word count: |
8620 |
| Text sample: |
| Interest Group Ideology and Lobbying Partner Selection: Models and Evidence from Amicus Curiae Briefs Richard A. Almeida Department of Political Science Southeast Missouri State University Mail Stop 2920 Cape Girardeau MO 63701 ralmeida@semo.edu Paper prepared for presentation at the 2005 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association September 1-4 2005 Washington DC. A previous version of this paper was prepared for the 2005 meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association. Helpful and instructive comments from Kevin Esterling and |
| 0.084 Vuong statistic 4.51*** 2.85*** α test of unobs. het. n/a 0.8028 z-score -0.64 N 378 378 Number of non-zero obs 71 71 Note: Standard errors in parentheses. Significant Vuong statistic indicates support for zero-inflated model. Non-significant α test indicates lack of unobserved heterogeneity. * Significant at 90% confidence level ** Significant at 95% confidence level *** Significant at 99% confidence level 32 |
Similar Titles:
Interest Group Coalitions and theSpatial Theory of Choice: A Spatial Model of Group Participation onAmicus Curiae Briefs.
Strange Bedfellows or the Usual Suspects? Spatial Models of Ideology and Interest Group Coalitions.
|
|