IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/ghxj8_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Nuts and Bolts of Automated Text Analysis. Comparing Different Document Pre-Processing Techniques in Four Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Greene, Zac
  • Ceron, Andrea
  • Schumacher, Gijs
  • Fazekas, Zoltan

Abstract

Automated text analytic techniques have taken on an increasingly important role in the study of parties and political speech. Researchers have studied manifestos, speeches in parliament, and debates at party national meetings. These methods have demonstrated substantial promise for measuring latent characteristics of texts. In application, however, scaling models require a large number of decisions on the part of the researcher that likely hold substantive implications for the analysis. Past researchers proposed discussion of these implications, but there is no clear prescription or systematic examination of these choices with the goal of establishing a set of best practices based on their implications for speeches at parties’ national meetings in a comparative setting. We examine the implications of these choices with data from intra-party meetings in Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and prime minister speeches in Denmark. We conclude with considerations for those undertaking political text analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • 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_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:ghxj8_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/ghxj8_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5818e72db83f690046ebf529/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/ghxj8_v1?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. Lo, James & Proksch, Sven-Oliver & Gschwend, Thomas, 2014. "A Common Left-Right Scale for Voters and Parties in Europe," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 205-223, April.
    2. King, Gary & Pan, Jennifer & Roberts, Margaret E., 2013. "How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(2), pages 326-343, May.
    3. Arthur Spirling, 2012. "U.S. Treaty Making with American Indians: Institutional Change and Relative Power, 1784–1911," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 84-97, January.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Lucas, Christopher & Nielsen, Richard A. & Roberts, Margaret E. & Stewart, Brandon M. & Storer, Alex & Tingley, Dustin, 2015. "Computer-Assisted Text Analysis for Comparative Politics," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 254-277, April.
    7. 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.
    8. Jonathan B. Slapin & Sven‐Oliver Proksch, 2008. "A Scaling Model for Estimating Time‐Series Party Positions from Texts," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 705-722, July.
    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. 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.
    2. Rebecca Cordell & Kristian Skrede Gleditsch & Florian G Kern & Laura Saavedra-Lux, 2020. "Measuring institutional variation across American Indian constitutions using automated content analysis," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(6), pages 777-788, November.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Richard A. Nielsen, 2020. "Adjusting for Confounding with Text Matching," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 887-903, October.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. LIM Jaehwan & ITO Asei & ZHANG Hongyong, 2023. "Policy Agenda and Trajectory of the Xi Jinping Administration: Textual Evidence from 2012 to 2022," Policy Discussion Papers 23008, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    9. Richard Hanania, 2021. "The Humanitarian Turn at the UNSC: Explaining the development of international norms through machine learning algorithms," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(4), pages 655-670, July.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. Karell, Daniel & Freedman, Michael Raphael, 2019. "Rhetorics of Radicalism," SocArXiv yfzsh_v1, Center for Open Science.
    13. Anselm Hager & Hanno Hilbig, 2020. "Does Public Opinion Affect Political Speech?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 921-937, October.
    14. Hager, Anselm & Hilbig, Hanno, 2020. "Does Public Opinion Affect Political Speech?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 64(4), pages 921-937.
    15. Karell, Daniel & Freedman, Michael Raphael, 2019. "Rhetorics of Radicalism," SocArXiv yfzsh, Center for Open Science.
    16. Sara Kahn-Nisser, 2019. "When the targets are members and donors: Analyzing inter-governmental organizations’ human rights shaming," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 431-451, September.
    17. Merz, Nicolas & Regel, Sven & Lewandowski, Jirka, 2016. "The Manifesto Corpus: A new resource for research on political parties and quantitative text analysis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 3(2 (April-), pages 1-8.
    18. H Andrew Schwartz & Johannes C Eichstaedt & Margaret L Kern & Lukasz Dziurzynski & Stephanie M Ramones & Megha Agrawal & Achal Shah & Michal Kosinski & David Stillwell & Martin E P Seligman & Lyle H U, 2013. "Personality, Gender, and Age in the Language of Social Media: The Open-Vocabulary Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    19. 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).
    20. 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.

    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:osf:osfxxx:ghxj8_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.