Skip to contents

rankingQ: Estimate Ranking-Based Quantities with Bias Correction

Overview

Ranking data offer valuable insights into the social sciences by allowing researchers to study how people make comparative judgments about multiple social and political options. However, a common practical concern is that data collected from ranking survey questions are often prone to measurement error due to insensible, random responses.

rankingQ estimates various ranking-based quantities based on any ranking data. rankingQ also allows users to correct for measurement error due to random responses by including an additional ranking question to detect such responses. The package provides plug-in bias-corrected estimators and inverse-probability weighting (IPW), while also supporting visualization helpers, and diagnostics for assessing anchor-ranking questions.

For the underlying methodology, see Atsusaka and Kim (2025), “Addressing Measurement Errors in Ranking Questions for the Social Sciences,” Political Analysis, 33(4), 339-360. Visit the package site for vignettes and references.

Correction Inputs

rankingQ supports three ways to handle random or inattentive responding in its correction functions.

  • Use anc_correct when you have an anchor ranking question.
  • Use p_random when you want to externally supply a plausible proportion of random or inattentive respondents.
  • Supply neither if no correction is necessary; this is the default behavior, and the functions will let you know that no correction was applied. Both imprr_direct and imprr_weights will return the uncorrected estimates in this case, but still print useful outputs such as average rankings, top-k rankings, and so on.

Installation

Currently, you can install the development version from GitHub:

remotes::install_github("sysilviakim/rankingQ", dependencies = TRUE)

For a full walkthrough of an example and downstream analysis, see the Getting Started vignette.

Key Features

  • Bias correction via plug-in estimator (imprr_direct): estimates average ranks, marginal rank probabilities, pairwise preferences, and top-k rankings with confidence intervals
  • Bias correction via IPW (imprr_weights): reweights observed ranking distributions to correct for random responses
  • Convenience augmentation (add_ipw_weights): returns the original data with respondent-level IPW weights attached
  • Visualization (plot_avg_ranking): plots corrected average rankings with uncertainty bounds
  • Diagnostics: tools for detecting bias and assessing anchor-ranking questions

Citation

If you use rankingQ, please cite:

Atsusaka, Yuki, and Seo-young Silvia Kim. 2025. “Addressing Measurement Errors in Ranking Questions for the Social Sciences.” Political Analysis 33(4): 339-360. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2024.33

@article{atsusaka_addressing_2025,
  author  = {Atsusaka, Yuki and Kim, Seo-young Silvia},
  title   = {Addressing Measurement Errors in Ranking Questions for the Social Sciences},
  journal = {Political Analysis},
  volume  = {33},
  number  = {4},
  pages   = {339--360},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1017/pan.2024.33}
}