Abstract
AbstractAs part of the “text-as-data” movement, Natural Language Processing (NLP) provides a computational way to examine political polarization. We conducted a methodological scoping review of studies published since 2010 (n = 154) to clarify how NLP research has conceptualized and measured political polarization, and to characterize the degree of integration of the two different research paradigms that meet in this research area. We identified biases toward US context (59%), Twitter data (43%) and machine learning approach (33%). Research covers different layers of the political public sphere (politicians, experts, media, or the lay public), however, very few studies involved more than one layer. Results indicate that only a few studies made use of domain knowledge and a high proportion of the studies were not interdisciplinary. Those studies that made efforts to interpret the results demonstrated that the characteristics of political texts depend not only on the political position of their authors, but also on other often-overlooked factors. Ignoring these factors may lead to overly optimistic performance measures. Also, spurious results may be obtained when causal relations are inferred from textual data. Our paper provides arguments for the integration of explanatory and predictive modeling paradigms, and for a more interdisciplinary approach to polarization research.
Funder
Nemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovaciós Alap
Eötvös Loránd University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Artificial Intelligence,Transportation
Reference96 articles.
1. DiMaggio, P., Evans, J., & Bryson, B. (1996). Have American’s social attitudes become more polarized? American Journal of Sociology, 102(3), 690–755. https://doi.org/10.1086/230995
2. Lelkes, Y. (2016). Mass Polarization: Manifestations and Measurements. Public Opinion Quartely, 80(S1), 392–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw005
3. Yarchi, M., Baden, C., & Kligler-Vilenchik, N. (2021). Political polarization on the digital sphere: A cross-platform, over-time analysis of interactional, positional, and affective polarization on social media. Political Communication, 38(1–2), 98–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1785067
4. Carius-Munz, L. M. (2020). Partisanship: Conceptualizations and consequences. In H. Oscarsson & S. Holmberg (Eds.), Research Handbook on Political Partisanship (pp. 47–59). Edward Elgar Publishing.
5. Demszky, D., Garg, N., Voigt, R., Zou, J., Gentzkow, M., Shapiro, J., Jurafsky, D (2019) Analyzing polarization in social media: Method and application to tweets on 21 mass shootings. In: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers). Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献