THE MEANS OF MEASURING CONFLICT AND COHESION IN THE LEGISLATURE

In: Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, Band 44, Heft 4, S. 377-388

Abstract

A brief review of previous studies containing quantative analyses of legislative voting behavior is followed by the author's own analysis which emphasizes the importance of a valid methodology. It is found that Rice-type indices are incapable of being evaluated by any fixed objective criterion & are defective as measures of cohesion & conflict. The probability-based measures, on the other hand, provide a feasible means that is both valid & objective of evaluating & comparing cohesion & conflict within legislative bodies. These 2 indices were applied to 98 roll-call votes in the sessions of both houses of the Kan legislature in 1959. The analysis produced no evidence that an Ur or Ru bloc of legislators existed in either house. There was no continuous antipathy between the 2 groups that reflected itself over a broad range of issues. Only rarely did Ur vs Ru antagonism come into play. Although party was a relatively important factor, at least in the House of Representatives, the data do not suggest that party considerations were very often a factor in the total voting pattern of the legislature. Modified Author's Summary.