Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T16:26:25.296Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Combining Forecasts for the 2021 German Federal Election: The PollyVote

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2021

Andreas Graefe*
Affiliation:
Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Munich

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Forecasting the 2021 German Elections
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Footnotes

This is an updated version of the original article. For details please see the notice at https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096521001797.

References

REFERENCES

Armstrong, J. Scott. 2001. “Combining Forecasts.” In Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners, ed. Scott Armstrong, J., 417–39. New York: Springer Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Alexander, Bender, Andreas, Klima, Andre, and Küchenhoff, Helmut. 2021. “Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur: Visual Communication of Uncertainty in Election Polls.” PS: Political Science & Politics. In this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, Goel, Sharad, Rivers, Douglas, and Rothschild, David. 2016. “The Mythical Swing Voter.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11 (1): 103–30. DOI: 10.1561/100.00015031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2014. “Accuracy of Vote Expectation Surveys in Forecasting Elections.” Public Opinion Quarterly 78 (S1): 204–32. DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfu008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2017. “Political Markets.” In The SAGE Handbook of Electoral Behavior, ed. Arzheimer, Kai, Evans, Jocelyn, and Lewis-Beck, Michael S., 861–82. London: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2018. “Predicting Elections: Experts, Polls, and Fundamentals.” Judgment and Decision Making 13 (4): 334–44.Google Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2019. “Accuracy of German Federal Election Forecasts, 2013 & 2017.” International Journal of Forecasting 35 (3): 868877. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2019.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2021a. “Embrace the Differences: Revisiting the PollyVote Method of Combining Forecasts for US Presidential Elections (2004 to 2020).” Social Science Research Network Working Paper. ssrn.com/abstract=3871059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graefe, Andreas. 2021b. “Replication Archive for: Combining Forecasts for the 2021 German Federal Election: The PollyVote.” Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/KWTJJV.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groß, Marcus. 2021. “A Long-Short Term Event Memory State-Space Model for Multi-Party Elections.” Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3697270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, Gschwend, Klara, Müller, Simon, Munzert, Marcel, Neunhoeffer, and Stoetzer, Lukas F.. 2021. “The Zweitstimme Model: A Dynamic Forecast of the 2021 German Federal Election.” PS: Political Science & Politics. DOI: 10.1017/S1049096521000913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Randall J. Jr. and Cuzán, Alfred G.. 2013. “Expert Judgment in Forecasting American Presidential Elections: A Preliminary Evaluation.” Chicago: Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. ssrn.com/abstract=2303052.Google Scholar
Kayser, Mark, and Leininger, Arndt. 2021. “A Länder-Based Forecast of the 2021 German Bundestag Election.” PS: Political Science & Politics. In this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murr, Andreas E., and Lewis-Beck, Michael S.. 2021. “Citizen Forecasts of the 2021 German Election.” PS: Political Science & Politics. In this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quinlan, Stephen, Schnaudt, Christian, and Lewis-Beck, Michael S.. 2021. “Forecasting Bloc Support in German Federal Elections: A Political-History Model.” PS: Political Science & Politics. In this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Graefe Dataset

Link