Miklós Sebők, Sven-Oliver Proksch, Christian Rauh, Péter Visnovitz, Gergő Balázs, Jan Schwalbach
{"title":"大规模计算文本分析时代的欧洲立法比较研究:评论文章","authors":"Miklós Sebők, Sven-Oliver Proksch, Christian Rauh, Péter Visnovitz, Gergő Balázs, Jan Schwalbach","doi":"10.1177/01925121231199904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advances in data accessibility and analytical methods opened new frontiers for comparative studies of European legislative activities. However, these advances still need to be fully harnessed by legislative scholars for multiple reasons. We provide an overview of extant research agendas to identify these reasons and explore the opportunities for tapping the potential of big data and quantitative text analysis. We present significant data collection efforts, such as ParlSpeech, the Comparative Agendas Project and CLARIN, and highlight their respective value for, primarily, large-N comparative research focusing on European Union member states and the European Union itself. Our review highlights the most consequential gaps in the literature and shortcomings of available data and analysis. These include the lack of extensive historical and geographical coverage, missing harmonisation and cross-linking between separate efforts, no unified speech and document (bill, law) databases, and the unavailability of good-quality full-text variables.","PeriodicalId":47785,"journal":{"name":"International Political Science Review","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative European legislative research in the age of large-scale computational text analysis: A review article\",\"authors\":\"Miklós Sebők, Sven-Oliver Proksch, Christian Rauh, Péter Visnovitz, Gergő Balázs, Jan Schwalbach\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01925121231199904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Advances in data accessibility and analytical methods opened new frontiers for comparative studies of European legislative activities. However, these advances still need to be fully harnessed by legislative scholars for multiple reasons. We provide an overview of extant research agendas to identify these reasons and explore the opportunities for tapping the potential of big data and quantitative text analysis. We present significant data collection efforts, such as ParlSpeech, the Comparative Agendas Project and CLARIN, and highlight their respective value for, primarily, large-N comparative research focusing on European Union member states and the European Union itself. Our review highlights the most consequential gaps in the literature and shortcomings of available data and analysis. These include the lack of extensive historical and geographical coverage, missing harmonisation and cross-linking between separate efforts, no unified speech and document (bill, law) databases, and the unavailability of good-quality full-text variables.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47785,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Political Science Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121231199904\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Science Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01925121231199904","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
数据获取和分析方法的进步为欧洲立法活动的比较研究开辟了新的领域。然而,由于多种原因,立法学者仍需充分利用这些进步。我们概述了现有的研究议程,以找出这些原因,并探索挖掘大数据和定量文本分析潜力的机会。我们介绍了重要的数据收集工作,如 ParlSpeech、比较议程项目和 CLARIN,并强调了它们各自的价值,主要是针对欧盟成员国和欧盟本身的大 N 比较研究。我们的综述强调了文献中最重要的空白以及现有数据和分析的不足之处。这些缺陷包括:缺乏广泛的历史和地理覆盖范围、不同工作之间缺乏协调和交叉链接、没有统一的言论和文件(法案、法律)数据库,以及无法获得高质量的全文变量。
Comparative European legislative research in the age of large-scale computational text analysis: A review article
Advances in data accessibility and analytical methods opened new frontiers for comparative studies of European legislative activities. However, these advances still need to be fully harnessed by legislative scholars for multiple reasons. We provide an overview of extant research agendas to identify these reasons and explore the opportunities for tapping the potential of big data and quantitative text analysis. We present significant data collection efforts, such as ParlSpeech, the Comparative Agendas Project and CLARIN, and highlight their respective value for, primarily, large-N comparative research focusing on European Union member states and the European Union itself. Our review highlights the most consequential gaps in the literature and shortcomings of available data and analysis. These include the lack of extensive historical and geographical coverage, missing harmonisation and cross-linking between separate efforts, no unified speech and document (bill, law) databases, and the unavailability of good-quality full-text variables.
期刊介绍:
IPSR is committed to publishing material that makes a significant contribution to international political science. It seeks to meet the needs of political scientists throughout the world who are interested in studying political phenomena in the contemporary context of increasing international interdependence and global change. IPSR reflects the aims and intellectual tradition of its parent body, the International Political Science Association: to foster the creation and dissemination of rigorous political inquiry free of subdisciplinary or other orthodoxy.