Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T05:52:49.000Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Choosing Reliable Statistical Software

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2002

Micah Altman
Affiliation:
Director of the Virtual Data Center project, which aims to promote the sharing of research data by building open-source software tools. He is also associate director of the Harvard-MIT Data Center, and a research associate in the Center for Basic Research in the Social Sciences at Harvard University. He has published (or in press) over ten articles, datasets, and reviews, on the topic of redistricting, numerical accuracy, and digital libraries.
Michaell P. McDonald
Affiliation:
Assistant professor of political studies at University of Illinois, Springfield. His methodological work is on the mechanics of estimation. His substantive work is in American Politics, covering voting behavior, Congress, and the intersection of the two, in both current and historical perspectives.

Extract

Should we trust the results of our statistical computations? Closely following the development of the mainframe computer, Longley (1967) criticized the accuracy of the first regression programs. Approximately every 10 years thereafter, similar comments echoed for each new generation of statistical software. In a recent criticism, McCullough and Vinod (1999) argue that commonly used statistical packages may give “horrendously inaccurate” results, which have gone largely unnoticed (635–37). Moreover, they argue that in consequence of these inaccuracies, past inferences are in question, and future work must document and archive statistical software alongside statistical models (660–62). When political scientists discuss accuracy in computer-intensive quantitative analysis, however, we are relatively sanguine. Numerical accuracy is almost never discussed in articles or even in textbooks geared toward the most sophisticated and computationally intensive techniques (e.g., King 1989; Mooney 1997). Notable exceptions are a forthcoming APSR controversy that depends on the meaning and evaluation of numerical accuracy in ecological inference (King 2001; Tam Cho and Gaines 2001) and a study of numerical accuracy issues in replication (Altman and McDonald 2001).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2001 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)