Skip to main content Accessibility help

The Generalization in the Generalized Event Count Model, with Comments on Achen, Amato, and Londregan

  • Gary King and Curtis S. Signorino


We use an analogy with the normal distribution and linear regression to demonstrate the need for the Generalized Event Count (GEC) model. We then show how the GEC provides a unified framework within which to understand a diversity of distributions used to model event counts, and how to express the model in one simple equation. Finally, we address the points made by Christopher Achen, Timothy Amato, and John Londregan. Amato's and Londregan's arguments are consistent with ours and provide additional interesting information and explanations. Unfortunately, the foundation on which Achen built his paper turns out to be incorrect, rendering all his novel claims about the GEC false (or in some cases irrelevant).



Hide All
Canon, David T. 1993. “Sacrificial Lambs or Strategic Politicians: Political Amateurs in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 37: 1119–41.
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1994. “A Unified Method of Evaluating Electoral Systems and Redistricting Plans.” American Journal of Political Science 38(2): 514–54. (Replication data set: ICPSR s1054).
Katz, Leo. 1965. “Unified Treatment of a Broad Class of Discrete Probability Distributions” in Patil, Ganapati P., ed., Classical and Contagious Discrete Distributions, 175–82. Calcutta: Statistical Publishing Society.
King, Gary. 1989a. Unifying Political Methodology: The Likelihood Theory of Statistical Inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
King, Gary. 1989b. “Variance Specification in Event Count Models: From Restrictive Assumptions to a Generalized Estimator.” American Journal of Political Science 33(3): 762–84.
King, Gary. 1989c. “Event Count Models for International Relations: Generalizations and Applications.” International Studies Quarterly 33(2): 123–47.
Krause, George A. 1994. “Federal Reserve Policy Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science 38(1): 124–44.
Maddala, G. S. 1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, Lisa L. 1992. Coercive Cooperation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
McCullagh, Peter, and Nelder, John A. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. 2nd Edition. London: Chapman and Hall.
Mullahy, John. 1986. “Specification and Testing of Some Modified Count Data Models.” Journal of Econometrics 33: 341–65.
Nixon, David. 1991. “Event Count Models for Supreme Court Dissents.” Political Methodologist 4: 1114.
Signorino, Curtis S. 1995. “The Generalized δ-Factorial.” Harvard University, mimeo.
Turna, Nancy Brandon, and Hannan, Michael T. 1984. Social Dynamics: Models and Methods. Orlando: Academic Press.
Wang, T. Y., Dixon, William J., Muller, Edward N., and Seligson, Mitchell A. 1993. “Inequality and Political Violence Revisited.” American Political Science Review 87(4): 979–93.
Winkelmann, Rainer. 1994. Count Data Models: Econometric Theory and an Application to Labor Mobility. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Winkelmann, Rainer, Signorino, Curtis S., and King, Gary. 1995. “A Correction for an Underdispersed Event Count Probability Distribution.” Political Analysis 5: 215–28.
Winkelmann, Rainer, and Zimmermann, Klaus F. 1991. “A New Approach for Modeling Economic Count Data.” Economics Letters 37: 139143.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Political Analysis
  • ISSN: 1047-1987
  • EISSN: 1476-4989
  • URL: /core/journals/political-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed