Event datasets, such as those provided by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), provide high-quality data on conflict fatalities. However, such data are likely to suffer from an unknown extent of bias and uncertainties in the reports they are based on. Although a substantial literature documents reporting bias in conflict research, analyses that quantify this bias are mostly limited to single countries. Here, we combine a survey with UCDP coders and statistical modeling to derive a distribution of plausible number of fatalities given the number of battle-related deaths and the type of violence documented by the UCDP. We provide a generalizable, cross-national measure of uncertainty around UCDP reported fatalities that is more robust and realistic than UCDP’s documented low and high estimates, countering UCDP’s intrinsic tendency to under-estimate fatalities, and we make available a dataset and R package that can be applied to future releases of the UCDP data.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Vesco et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69d893406c1944d70ce04477 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220027261423826
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
Paola Vesco
David Randahl
Håvard Hegre
Journal of Conflict Resolution
Uppsala University
Peace Research Institute Oslo
Swedish Defence University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...