IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/87624.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Themes and topics in parliamentary oversight hearings: a new direction in textual data analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sanders, James
  • Lisi, Giulio
  • Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl

Abstract

This paper contributes to the growing empirical work on deliberation in legislatures by proposing a novel approach to analysing parliamentary hearings using both thematic and topic modelling textual analysis software. We explore variations in deliberative quality across economic policy type (fiscal policy, monetary policy and financial stability) and across parliamentary chambers (Commons and Lords) in UK select committee oversight hearings during the 2010–2015 Parliament. Our overall focus is not only to suggest a multi-method approach to the textual analysis of parliamentary data, but also to explore more substantive aspects of parliamentary oversight, such as: (1) the extent to which oversight varies between unelected and elected policy makers; and (2) whether parliamentarians conduct oversight more forcefully or more along partisan lines when they are challenging fellow politicians as opposed to central bank officials. Our findings suggest consistent differences in deliberative styles between types of hearings (fiscal, monetary, financial stability) and between chambers (Commons, Lords).

Suggested Citation

  • Sanders, James & Lisi, Giulio & Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl, 2018. "Themes and topics in parliamentary oversight hearings: a new direction in textual data analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87624, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:87624
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/87624/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimmer, Justin, 2010. "A Bayesian Hierarchical Topic Model for Political Texts: Measuring Expressed Agendas in Senate Press Releases," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-35, January.
    2. Bawn, Kathleen, 1995. "Political Control Versus Expertise: Congressional Choices about Administrative Procedures," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(1), pages 62-73, March.
    3. Grün, Bettina & Hornik, Kurt, 2011. "topicmodels: An R Package for Fitting Topic Models," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 40(i13).
    4. André Bächtiger & Dominik Hangartner, 2010. "When Deliberative Theory Meets Empirical Political Science: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Political Deliberation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58, pages 609-629, October.
    5. Margaret Roberts & Brandon Stewart & Tingley, Dustin, 2014. "stm: R Package for Structural Topic Models," Working Paper 176291, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    6. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Dustin Tingley & Christopher Lucas & Jetson Leder‐Luis & Shana Kushner Gadarian & Bethany Albertson & David G. Rand, 2014. "Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 1064-1082, October.
    7. Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey, 2006. "From the Corn Laws to Free Trade: Interests, Ideas, and Institutions in Historical Perspective," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262195437, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Grimmer, Justin & Stewart, Brandon M., 2013. "Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 267-297, July.
    10. 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.
    11. André Bächtiger & Dominik Hangartner, 2010. "When Deliberative Theory Meets Empirical Political Science: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Political Deliberation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 58(4), pages 609-629, October.
    12. Barabas, Jason, 2004. "How Deliberation Affects Policy Opinions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 687-701, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fraccaroli, Nicolò & Giovannini, Alessandro & Jamet, Jean-François & Persson, Eric, 2022. "Ideology and monetary policy. The role of political parties’ stances in the European Central Bank’s parliamentary hearings," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Giulia Ferrari, 2022. "What is wellbeing for rural South African women? Textual analysis of focus group discussion transcripts and implications for programme design and evaluation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Nicolò Fraccaroli & Alessandro Giovannini & Jean-François Jamet & Eric Persson, 2023. "Central Banks in Parliaments: A Text Analysis of the Parliamentary Hearings of the Bank of England, the European Central Bank, and the Federal Reserve," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 19(2), pages 543-600, June.
    4. Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl & Dann, Christopher & Chapman, Jacob, 2022. "The accountability gap: Deliberation on monetary policy in Britain and America during the financial crisis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    5. Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl & Dann, Christopher & Chapman, Jacob, 2022. "The accountability gap: deliberation on monetary policy in Britain and America during the financial crisis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114364, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Sanders James & Lisi Giulio & Schonhardt-Bailey Cheryl, 2017. "Themes and Topics in Parliamentary Oversight Hearings: A New Direction in Textual Data Analysis," Statistics, Politics and Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 153-194, December.
    2. Lino Wehrheim, 2019. "Economic history goes digital: topic modeling the Journal of Economic History," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 13(1), pages 83-125, January.
    3. Lehotský, Lukáš & Černoch, Filip & Osička, Jan & Ocelík, Petr, 2019. "When climate change is missing: Media discourse on coal mining in the Czech Republic," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 774-786.
    4. Mourtgos, Scott M. & Adams, Ian T., 2019. "The rhetoric of de-policing: Evaluating open-ended survey responses from police officers with machine learning-based structural topic modeling," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl & Dann, Christopher & Chapman, Jacob, 2022. "The accountability gap: deliberation on monetary policy in Britain and America during the financial crisis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114364, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. 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.
    7. Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl & Dann, Christopher & Chapman, Jacob, 2022. "The accountability gap: Deliberation on monetary policy in Britain and America during the financial crisis," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Michal Ovádek & Nicolas Lampach & Arthur Dyevre, 2020. "What’s the talk in Brussels? Leveraging daily news coverage to measure issue attention in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 204-232, June.
    9. Yang Bao & Anindya Datta, 2014. "Simultaneously Discovering and Quantifying Risk Types from Textual Risk Disclosures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1371-1391, June.
    10. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    11. Ulrich Fritsche & Johannes Puckelwald, 2018. "Deciphering Professional Forecasters’ Stories - Analyzing a Corpus of Textual Predictions for the German Economy," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201804, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    12. Seraphine F. Maerz & Carsten Q. Schneider, 2020. "Comparing public communication in democracies and autocracies: automated text analyses of speeches by heads of government," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 517-545, April.
    13. Born, Andreas & Janssen, Aljoscha, 2020. "Does a District-Vote Matter for the Behavior of Politicians? A Textual Analysis of Parliamentary Speeches," Working Paper Series 1320, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    14. Keith Carlson & Michael A. Livermore & Daniel N. Rockmore, 2020. "The Problem of Data Bias in the Pool of Published U.S. Appellate Court Opinions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 224-261, June.
    15. Justyna Klejdysz & Robin L. Lumsdaine, 2023. "Shifts in ECB Communication: A Textual Analysis of the Press Conference," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 19(2), pages 473-542, June.
    16. Arina Wischnewsky & David‐Jan Jansen & Matthias Neuenkirch, 2021. "Financial stability and the Fed: Evidence from congressional hearings," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 1192-1214, July.
    17. Jennifer Pan & Margaret E. Roberts, 2020. "Censorship’s Effect on Incidental Exposure to Information: Evidence From Wikipedia," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    18. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.
    19. David Bholat & Stephen Hans & Pedro Santos & Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey, 2015. "Text mining for central banks," Handbooks, Centre for Central Banking Studies, Bank of England, number 33, April.
    20. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Schumacher, Kira & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "Topic Modeling Uncovers Shifts in Media Framing of the German Renewable Energy Act," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 2(1).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:87624. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.