IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bin/bpeajo/v43y2012i2012-02p1-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Political Polarization and the Dynamics of Political Language: Evidence from 130 Years of Partisan Speech

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob Jensen

    (Stanford University)

  • Ethan Kaplan

    (University of Maryland at College Park)

  • Suresh Naidu

    (Columbia University)

  • Laurence Wilse-Samson

    (Columbia University)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob Jensen & Ethan Kaplan & Suresh Naidu & Laurence Wilse-Samson, 2012. "Political Polarization and the Dynamics of Political Language: Evidence from 130 Years of Partisan Speech," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 43(2 (Fall)), pages 1-81.
    • Handle: RePEc:bin:bpeajo:v:43:y:2012:i:2012-02:p:1-81
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/2012b_Jensen.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabina J Sloman & Daniel M Oppenheimer & Simon DeDeo, 2021. "Can we detect conditioned variation in political speech? two kinds of discussion and types of conversation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Mohamed M. Mostafa, 2023. "A one-hundred-year structural topic modeling analysis of the knowledge structure of international management research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 3905-3935, August.
    3. Azzimonti, Marina, 2018. "Partisan conflict and private investment," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 114-131.
    4. Renáta Németh, 2023. "A scoping review on the use of natural language processing in research on political polarization: trends and research prospects," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 289-313, April.
    5. Mirko Draca & Carlo Schwarz, 2024. "How Polarised are Citizens? Measuring Ideology from the Ground up," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(661), pages 1950-1984.
    6. Elliott Ash & Daniel L. Chen & Suresh Naidu, 2022. "Ideas Have Consequences : The Impact of Law and Economics on American Justice," Working Papers hal-03899739, HAL.
    7. Patrick Doreian & Andrej Mrvar, 2022. "Public issues, policy proposals, social movements, and the interests of the Koch Brothers network of allies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 305-332, February.
    8. Marina Azzimonti-Renzo, 2014. "Partisan conflict," Working Papers 14-19, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    9. Scott R. Baker & Nicholas Bloom & Brandice Canes-Wrone & Steven J. Davis & Jonathan Rodden, 2014. "Why Has US Policy Uncertainty Risen since 1960?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 56-60, May.
    10. Ash, Elliott & Gauthier, Germain & Widmer, Philine, 2024. "Relatio: Text Semantics Capture Political and Economic Narratives," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 115-132, January.
    11. Roland G. Fryer, Jr. & Philipp Harms & Matthew O. Jackson, 2013. "Updating Beliefs with Ambiguous Evidence: Implications for Polarization," NBER Working Papers 19114, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Caroline Le Pennec, 2024. "Strategic Campaign Communication: Evidence from 30,000 Candidate Manifestos," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(658), pages 785-810.
    13. Gloria Gennaro & Giampaolo Lecce & Massimo Morelli, 2019. "Intertemporal Evidence on the Strategy of Populism," Working Papers 647, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    14. Bose, Neha, 2020. "Attitude towards Immigrants: Evidence from U.S. Congressional Speeches," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 464, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    15. Marina Azzimonti-Renzo, 2013. "The political polarization index," Working Papers 13-41, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    16. Bose, Neha, 2020. "Attitude towards Immigrants: Evidence from U.S. Congressional Speeches," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1259, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    17. Hacioglu Hoke, Sinem, 2019. "Macroeconomic effects of political risk shocks," Bank of England working papers 841, Bank of England.
    18. Jeremias Nieminen & Salla Simola & Janne Tukiainen, 2023. "Political representation and the evolution of group differences within parties: Evidence from 110 years of parliamentary speech," Discussion Papers 161, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    19. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro & Matt Taddy, 2019. "Measuring Group Differences in High‐Dimensional Choices: Method and Application to Congressional Speech," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(4), pages 1307-1340, July.
    20. Eleonora Alabrese & Francesco Capozza & Prashant Garg, 2024. "Politicized Scientists: Credibility Cost of Political Expression on Twitter," CESifo Working Paper Series 11254, CESifo.
    21. Morales, Juan S., 2021. "Legislating during war: Conflict and politics in Colombia," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    22. Gloria Gennaro & Elliott Ash, 2022. "Emotion and Reason in Political Language," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(643), pages 1037-1059.
    23. King, Jesse & Gonzales, Amy L., 2023. "The influence of digital divide frames on legislative passage and partisan sponsorship: A content analysis of digital equity legislation in the U.S. from 1990 to 2020," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7).
    24. Gavin Abercrombie & Riza Batista-Navarro, 2020. "Sentiment and position-taking analysis of parliamentary debates: a systematic literature review," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 245-270, April.

    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:bin:bpeajo:v:43:y:2012:i:2012-02:p:1-81. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Haowen Chen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esbrous.html .

    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.