Despite the ongoing success of populist parties in many parts of the world, we lack comprehensive information about parties' level of populism over time. A recent contribution to Political Analysis by Di Cocco and Monechi (DCM) suggests that this research gap can be closed by predicting parties' populism scores from their election manifestos using supervised machine learning. In this paper, we provide a detailed discussion of the suggested approach. Building on recent debates about the validation of machine-learning models, we argue that the validity checks provided in DCM's paper are insufficient. We conduct a series of additional validity checks and empirically demonstrate that the approach is not suitable for deriving populism scores from texts. We conclude that measuring populism over time and between countries remains an immense challenge for empirical research. More generally, our paper illustrates the importance of more comprehensive validations of supervised machine-learning models.
CITATION STYLE
Jankowski, M., & Huber, R. A. (2023). When Correlation Is Not Enough: Validating Populism Scores from Supervised Machine-Learning Models. Political Analysis, 31(4), 591–605. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2022.32
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.