The Future of Ecological Inference Research: A Reply to Freedman et Al.
Gary King. 1999.
"The Future of Ecological Inference Research: A Reply to Freedman et Al.".
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94, Pp. 352-55.

Abstract
I appreciate the editor’s invitation to reply to Freedman et al.’s (1998) review of “A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data” (Princeton University Press.) I welcome this scholarly critique and JASA’s decision to publish in this field. Ecological inference is a large and very important area for applications that is especially rich with open statistical questions. I hope this discussion stimulates much new scholarship. Freedman et al. raise several interesting issues, but also misrepresent or misunderstand the prior literature, my approach, and their own empirical analyses, and compound the problem, by refusing requests from me and the editor to make their data and software available for this note. Some clarification is thus in order.
See Also
- [Book] A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem: Reconstructing Individual Behavior from Aggregate Data (1997)
- [Paper] Bayesian and Frequentist Inference for Ecological Inference: The RxC Case (2001)
- [Paper] A Consensus on Second Stage Analyses in Ecological Inference Models (2003)
- [Paper] Analyzing Second Stage Ecological Regressions (2003)
- [Paper] Finding New Information for Ecological Inference Models: A Comment on Jon Wakefield, 'Ecological Inference in 2X2 Tables' (2004)
- [Paper] Geography, Statistics, and Ecological Inference (2000)
- [Paper] Isolating Spatial Autocorrelation, Aggregation Bias, and Distributional Violations in Ecological Inference (2002)
- [Book] Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, New Edition (2021)