IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v54y2010i1p209-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Analyze Political Attention with Minimal Assumptions and Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin M. Quinn
  • Burt L. Monroe
  • Michael Colaresi
  • Michael H. Crespin
  • Dragomir R. Radev

Abstract

Previous methods of analyzing the substance of political attention have had to make several restrictive assumptions or been prohibitively costly when applied to large‐scale political texts. Here, we describe a topic model for legislative speech, a statistical learning model that uses word choices to infer topical categories covered in a set of speeches and to identify the topic of specific speeches. Our method estimates, rather than assumes, the substance of topics, the keywords that identify topics, and the hierarchical nesting of topics. We use the topic model to examine the agenda in the U.S. Senate from 1997 to 2004. Using a new database of over 118,000 speeches (70,000,000 words) from the Congressional Record, our model reveals speech topic categories that are both distinctive and meaningfully interrelated and a richer view of democratic agenda dynamics than had previously been possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin M. Quinn & Burt L. Monroe & Michael Colaresi & Michael H. Crespin & Dragomir R. Radev, 2010. "How to Analyze Political Attention with Minimal Assumptions and Costs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 209-228, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:54:y:2010:i:1:p:209-228
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00427.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00427.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00427.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stimson, James A. & Mackuen, Michael B. & Erikson, Robert S., 1995. "Dynamic Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 543-565, September.
    2. Gelman A. & Pasarica C. & Dodhia R., 2002. "Lets Practice What We Preach: Turning Tables into Graphs," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 56, pages 121-130, May.
    3. Monroe, Burt L. & Colaresi, Michael P. & Quinn, Kevin M., 2008. "Fightin' Words: Lexical Feature Selection and Evaluation for Identifying the Content of Political Conflict," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 372-403.
    4. Peltzman, Sam, 1985. "An Economic Interpretation of the History of Congressional Voting in the Twentieth Century," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 656-675, September.
    5. Laver, Michael & Benoit, Kenneth & Garry, John, 2003. "Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(2), pages 311-331, May.
    6. Cary, Charles D., 1977. "A Technique of Computer Content Analysis of Transliterated Russian Language Textual Materials: A Research Note," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(1), pages 245-251, March.
    7. Krehbiel, Keith & Shepsle, Kenneth A. & Weingast, Barry R., 1987. "Why are Congressional Committees Powerful?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 81(3), pages 929-945, September.
    8. King, Gary & Lowe, Will, 2003. "An Automated Information Extraction Tool for International Conflict Data with Performance as Good as Human Coders: A Rare Events Evaluation Design," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(3), pages 617-642, July.
    9. Lowe, Will, 2008. "Understanding Wordscores," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 356-371.
    10. Miller, Warren E. & Stokes, Donald E., 1963. "Constituency Influence in Congress," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 45-56, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.
    2. Pongsak Luangaram & Yuthana Sethapramote, 2016. "Central Bank Communication and Monetary Policy Effectiveness: Evidence from Thailand," PIER Discussion Papers 20, Puey Ungphakorn Institute for Economic Research.
    3. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.
    4. Weiss, Max & Zoorob, Michael, 2021. "Political frames of public health crises: Discussing the opioid epidemic in the US Congress," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    5. Martin Haselmayer & Marcelo Jenny, 2017. "Sentiment analysis of political communication: combining a dictionary approach with crowdcoding," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(6), pages 2623-2646, November.
    6. Pierre-Marc Daigneault & Dominic Duval & Louis M. Imbeau, 2018. "Supervised scaling of semi-structured interview transcripts to characterize the ideology of a social policy reform," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(5), pages 2151-2162, September.
    7. Andranik Tangian, 2017. "Policy Representation of a Parliament: The Case of the German Bundestag 2013 Elections," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 151-179, January.
    8. Mansbridge, Jane, 2008. "A "Selection Model" of Political Representation," Working Paper Series rwp08-010, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Daniel J. Hopkins & Gary King, 2010. "A Method of Automated Nonparametric Content Analysis for Social Science," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 229-247, January.
    10. Roman Senninger & Daniel Bischof, 2018. "Working in unison: Political parties and policy issue transfer in the multilevel space," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(1), pages 140-162, March.
    11. Caroline Le Pennec, 2020. "Strategic Campaign Communication: Evidence from 30,000 Candidate Manifestos," SoDa Laboratories Working Paper Series 2020-05, Monash University, SoDa Laboratories.
    12. Gropp, Reint E. & Radev, Deyan, 2017. "Social centralisation, bank integration and the transmission of lending shocks," IWH Discussion Papers 18/2017, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    13. Greene, Zac & Ceron, Andrea & Schumacher, Gijs & Fazekas, Zoltan, 2016. "The Nuts and Bolts of Automated Text Analysis. Comparing Different Document Pre-Processing Techniques in Four Countries," OSF Preprints ghxj8, Center for Open Science.
    14. Jonathan P. Kastellec & Jeffrey R. Lax, 2008. "Case Selection and the Study of Judicial Politics," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 407-446, September.
    15. Barth, Andreas & Radev, Deyan, 2022. "Integration culture of global banks and the transmission of lending shocks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    16. Chatterji, Aaron K. & Kim, Joowon & McDevitt, Ryan C., 2018. "School spirit: Legislator school ties and state funding for higher education," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 254-269.
    17. Benček, David, 2016. "Opportunistic candidates and knowledgeable voters: A recipe for extreme views," Kiel Working Papers 2047, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    18. Michael Scharkow, 2013. "Thematic content analysis using supervised machine learning: An empirical evaluation using German online news," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 761-773, February.
    19. Gianluca Vagnani & Michele Simoni, 2016. "Technological uncertainty, market orientation and firms? economic performance," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 143-167.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:54:y:2010:i:1:p:209-228. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.