IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v40y2010i03p587-611_99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Position Taking in European Parliament Speeches

Author

Listed:
  • Proksch, Sven-Oliver
  • Slapin, Jonathan B.

Abstract

This article examines how national parties and their members position themselves in European Parliament (EP) debates, estimating the principal latent dimension of spoken conflict using word counts from legislative speeches. We then examine whether the estimated ideal points reflect partisan conflict on a left–right, European integration or national politics dimension. Using independent measures of national party positions on these three dimensions, we find that the corpus of EP speeches reflects partisan divisions over EU integration and national divisions rather than left–right politics. These results are robust to both the choice of language used to scale the speeches and to a range of statistical models that account for measurement error of the independent variables and the hierarchical structure of the data.

Suggested Citation

  • Proksch, Sven-Oliver & Slapin, Jonathan B., 2010. "Position Taking in European Parliament Speeches," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 587-611, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:40:y:2010:i:03:p:587-611_99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123409990299/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.
    2. Jonathan B Slapin & Sven-Oliver Proksch, 2010. "Look who’s talking: Parliamentary debate in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(3), pages 333-357, September.
    3. Tim Veen, 2011. "Positions and salience in European Union politics: Estimation and validation of a new dataset," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(2), pages 267-288, June.
    4. Hanna Bäck & Marc Debus & Wolfgang C. Müller, 2016. "Intra-party diversity and ministerial selection in coalition governments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 355-378, March.
    5. Born, Andreas & Janssen, Aljoscha, 2022. "Does a district mandate matter for the behavior of politicians? An analysis of roll-call votes and parliamentary speeches," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Miriam Barnum & James Lo, 2020. "Is the NPT unraveling? Evidence from text analysis of review conference statements," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 740-751, November.
    7. Iskander De Bruycker & Anne Rasmussen, 2021. "Blessing or Curse for Congruence? How Interest Mobilization Affects Congruence between Citizens and Elected Representatives," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(4), pages 909-928, July.
    8. Snorre Sylvester Frid-Nielsen, 2018. "Human rights or security? Positions on asylum in European Parliament speeches," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 344-362, June.
    9. Adina Akbik & Marta Migliorati, 2023. "Between Ideology and Nationality: Drivers of Legislative Oversight in the European Parliament's Economic Dialogues," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(4), pages 1026-1046, July.
    10. Stefanie Walter & Lucy Kinski & Zsófia Boda, 2023. "Who talks to whom? Using social network models to understand debate networks in the European Parliament," European Union Politics, , vol. 24(2), pages 410-423, June.
    11. Sven-Oliver Proksch & James Lo, 2012. "Reflections on the European integration dimension," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(2), pages 317-333, June.
    12. Diaf, Sami & Döpke, Jörg & Fritsche, Ulrich & Rockenbach, Ida, 2022. "Sharks and minnows in a shoal of words: Measuring latent ideological positions based on text mining techniques," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    13. Heike Klüver, 2015. "The promises of quantitative text analysis in interest group research: A reply to Bunea and Ibenskas," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 456-466, September.
    14. 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.

    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:cup:bjposi:v:40:y:2010:i:03:p:587-611_99. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    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.