ABSTRACT
This chapter explores some of the basic problems involved in the use of expert-generated data and surveys available strategies to mitigate those difficulties. A host of social scientists has at one time or another argued for the merits of using expert-judgment data to supplement more typical modes of cross-national measurement, such as those based on “aggregate” or events data (Hill, forthcoming; Hudson, 1973: 628; O’Leary and Coplin, 1975: 143–170; Merritt, 1970; Mueller, 1969). This technique, on its surface, appears to satisfy a long list of criticisms of traditional data sources in this field. The technique can provide systematically comparable information for a number of polities about which no single scholar is likely to have personal in-depth knowledge. Such information not only allows for cross-sectional comparative analysis, but when generated periodically can provide the basis for longitudinal assessments. Also, as Linstone (1978) has noted, expert panels can be particularly useful when the problem does not lend itself to evaluation by precise analytic techniques but can benefit from subjective judgmental assessment or where it is difficult to get the desired group of experts together on a face-to-face basis. In sum, the technique appears to offer a useful, relatively unexplored data source for cross-national analysis.
