Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The NOMINATE algorithm has become the most important analytical tool used in the study of the United States Congress. As such, congressional scholars have developed a great many social conventions, practices, and assumptions that enable interpretation of the statistical artifacts the algorithm produces. However, as many of these scholars recognize, serious problems emerge whenever we try to translate these statistical artifacts into language and thus attempt to assign them meaning in historical analysis. These problems are irresolvable because they reside in the very construction of the algorithm itself.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richard Franklin Bensel (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: