Cover not available
Part of
From Text to Political Positions: Text analysis across disciplines
Edited by Bertie Kaal, Isa Maks and Annemarie van Elfrinkhof
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 55] 2014
► pp. 1–20

Positions of Parties and Political Cleavages between Parties in Texts

 | VU University Amsterdam, Department of Communication Science
 | VU University Amsterdam, Department of Communication Science
If humans are political animals, and language is their most versatile communication tool, then the old question about what should be extracted from political texts to understand politics deserves on-going attention. Recent advances in the information and communication sciences have resulted in new means to process political texts, especially advances in the domains of knowledge representation, natural language parsing, automated content analysis and semantic web technologies. However, applying these innovations to uncover what matters in politics is far from trivial. The aim of this chapter is to give an introduction to an analysis of political texts aimed at inferring their political meaning.
Published online: 7 May 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.55.01kle
References (46)
References
Ansolabehere, S., and S. Iyengar. 1995. Going Negative: How Attack Ads Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Antoniou, G., and F. van Harmelen. 2004. A Semantic Web Primer. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Budge, I., and D.J. Farlie. 1983. Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issues Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: George, Allen and Urwin.Google Scholar
Budge, I., H.D. Klingemann, A. Volkens,, J. Bara, and Tanenbaum, E. 2001. Mapping Policy Preferences: Estimates for Parties, Electors, and Governments, 1945–1998. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Budge, I., D. Robertson, and D. Hearl. 1987. Ideology, Strategy and Party Change: A Spatial Analysis of Post-war Election Programmes in 19 Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cappella, J.I., and K.H. Jamieson. 1997. Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and The Public Good. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Tocqueville, A.C.C. 1951 [1835]. De la Démocratie en Amérique. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Deetjen, G. 1977. Industriellenprofile in Massenmedien: Ein neuer Ansatz zur Aussagenanalyse. Hamburg: Verlag Hans-Bredow-Institut.Google Scholar
Dixon, R.M.W. 1992. A New Approach to English Grammar, Based on Semantic Principles. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
. 2005. A Semantic approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 2009. Alexis de Tocqueville: The First Social Scientist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, D. 2005. Candidate qualities through a partisan lens: a theory of trait ownership. American Journal of Political Science 49(4), pp. 908–923. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. 1946. Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology, 21(1), pp. 107–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hetherington, M.J. 1996. The media’s role in forming voters’ national economic evaluations in 1992. American Journal of Political Science 40(2), pp. 372–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, B., and F. Baumgartner. 2005. The Politics of Attention: How Government Prioritizes Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Klein, D., and Ch.D. Manning. 2003. Fast exact inference with a factored model for natural language parsing. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 15 (NIPS 2002), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 3–10.Google Scholar
Kleinnijenhuis, J. 2008. Reasoning in economic discourse: A network approach to the Dutch Press. In K. Krippendorff and M.A. Bock (eds), The Content Analysis Reader, pp. 430–442. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Kleinnijenhuis, J., and P. Pennings. 2001. Measurement of party positions on the basis of party programmes, media coverage and voter perceptions. In M. Laver (ed.), Estimating the Policy Positions of Political Actors. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 162–182Google Scholar
Kleinnijenhuis, J., A.M.J. Van Hoof, D. Oegema, and J.A. De Ridder. 2007. A test of rivaling approaches to explain news effects: News on issue positions of parties, real world developments, support and criticism, and success and failure. Journal of Communication 57(2), pp. 366–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krippendorff, K. 2004. Content Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Lappin, S. and Laess, H.J. 1994. An algorithm for pronominal anaphora resolution. Computational Linguistics, 20(4), pp. 535–561.Google Scholar
Lipset, S., and S. Rokkan. 1967. Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments: An Introduction. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
McCombs, M.E. 2004. Setting the Agenda: The Mass Media and Public Opinion. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Mena-Montes, N. 2010. Un estudio sobre la inmigración (2000–2008): La construcción de la agenda (Agenda Building) y la evolución de los encuadres (Frame Building) en el discurso político-parlamentario, mediático y sus referencias a la opinión pública (with an extended English summary). Madrid: Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (PhD dissertation).Google Scholar
Noelle-Neumann, E. 1980. Die Schweigespirale: Öffentliche Meinung -- unsere soziale Haut. Frankfurt am Main: Ullstein.Google Scholar
Osgood, C.E., S. Saporta, and J.C. Nunally. 1956. Evaluative assertion analysis. Litera 3, pp. 47–102.Google Scholar
Patterson, T.E. 1993. Out of Order. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Petrocik, J.R. 1996. Issue ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science 40, pp. 825–850. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richardson, J.E. 2004. (Mis) Representing Islam: The Racism and Rhetoric of British Broadsheet Newspapers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rogers, E.M., J.W. Dearing, and D. Bregman. 1993. The anatomy of agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication 43(2), pp. 68–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruigrok, N., and W. van Atteveldt. 2007. Global angling with a local angle: How U.S., British, and Dutch newspapers frame global and local terrorist attacks. The Harvard International Journal of Press and Politics 12, pp. 68–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, D., and N. Gavin. 2004. Television news, economic perceptions and political preferences in Britain, 1997–2001. The Journal of Politics 66(4), pp. 1245–1266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, J. 1950 (published first in 1943). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Severin, W., and J.W. Tankard. 2005 (5th ed.). Communication Theories: Origins, Methods, Uses. New York: Addison-Wesley / Longman.Google Scholar
Shah, D.V., M.D. Watts. D. Domke, and D.P. Fan. 2002. News framing and cueing of issue regimes: Explaining clinton’s public approval in spite of scandal Public Opinion Quarterly 66(3), pp. 339–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soroka, S. 2006. Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information Journal of Politics 68(2), pp. 372–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomz, M., and R.P. van Houweling. 2008. Candidate positioning and voter choice. American Political Science Review 102(3), pp. 303–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 48(4), pp. 327–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Atteveldt, W. 2008. Semantic network analysis. Techniques for extracting, representing and querying media content. PhD Thesis. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar
van Atteveldt, W. 2008. Semantic Network Analysis: Techniques for Extracting, Representing and Querying Media Content. Charleston, SC: BookSurge Publishers.Google Scholar
Van Atteveldt, W., J. Kleinnijenhuis, and N. Ruigrok. 2008. Parsing, semantic networks, and political authority: Using syntactic analysis to extract semantic relations from Dutch newspaper articles. Political Analysis, 16(4), pp. 428–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Cuilenburg, J.J., J. Kleinnijenhuis, and J.A. de Ridder. 1986. Towards a graph theory of journalistic texts. European Journal of Communication 1, pp. 65–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Noord, G.-J. 2006. At last parsing is now operational. In Mertens, P., C. Fairon, A. Dister, and P. Watrin (eds). TALN06. Verbum Ex Machina. Actes de la 13e conference sur le traitement automatique des langues naturelles, pp. 20–42.Google Scholar
Westholm, A. 1997. Distance versus direction: the illusory defeat of the proximity theory of electoral choice. The American Political Science Review 91(4), pp. 865–883. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung. ­London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Gross, Justin & Dana Nestor
2024. Algorithmic Text Analysis. In Oxford Handbook of Engaged Methodological Pluralism in Political Science (Vol 1), DOI logo
Ferguson, Julie E., Peter Groenewegen, Christine Moser, Stephen P. Borgatti & John W. Mohr
2017. Structure, Content, and Meaning of Organizational Networks: Extending Network Thinking, Introduction. In Structure, Content and Meaning of Organizational Networks [Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 53], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.