The Lacuna Project

lacuna (n.) a gap in a record where something should be

Independent research. Not affiliated with any government, agency, or company.

Exhibit 697

Testing Inferences about American Politics: A Review of the 'Oligarchy' Result

Exhibit 697 ยท Peer-reviewed article

Testing Inferences about American Politics: A Review of the 'Oligarchy' Result

average Americans have received their preferred policy outcome roughly as often as elites have when the two groups have disagreed with each other.

Reproduces Gilens and Page Table 3 using the authors' AMOS input diagram and replication data, then simulates. With the enforced 50th/90th correlation of .78, a true median-income coefficient of about 0.4 is estimated as essentially zero in over 20 percent of trials; at lower correlations the problem disappears. Descriptive reanalysis of the same dataset: in 185 cases where the two income groups' majorities are on opposite sides, the median-income side gets its preferred outcome 47 percent of the time; at 80 percent-plus support for change, change is enacted 47 percent of the time for median-income support and 52 percent for elites; when neither the rich nor the average favor change, change still occurs 23 percent of the time. Bashir states that the 'oligarchy' label comes from journalistic accounts, not Gilens and Page, and that his review does not show the wealthy and business lack advantages.

Source
Omar S. Bashir, Research & Politics 2(4), October-December 2015
Date
October-December 2015
Quoted from
Abstract, p. 1
Grade
Peer-reviewed
Document
https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015608896
Accessed
2026-11-09
Cited by
Findings citing this exhibit

Cited by

Finding POL-2.3
Peer-reviewed Bashir reproduced the Gilens-Page estimates and simulated the estimator. With the 50th and 90th percentile preferences correlated at .78, a true median-income coefficient of about 0.4 was estimated as essentially zero in over 20 percent of trials.
Finding POL-2.4
Peer-reviewed In the 185 of 1,779 Gilens-Page cases where the median-income and affluent majorities took opposite sides, the median-income side got its preferred outcome 47 percent of the time and the affluent side 53 percent. Gilens and Page accept these figures.