The Experts below are selected from a list of 9882 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Bruno Wüest - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • polls as public politic linkage a comparative analysis of poll use and roles of mps in Parliamentary Debate
    The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2008
    Co-Authors: Jürgen Petersen, Sibylle Hardmeier, Bruno Wüest
    Abstract:

    Opinion polls as a linkage mechanism between the public and politics have rarely been examined in a Parliamentary context. In our comparative study (Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) we analyse if and how polls are invoked by MPs with different roles in Parliamentary Debates. Focusing on three theoretical aspects (responsiveness, populism and deliberation), we find that polls are indeed invoked to bring the views of the public into Parliamentary Debate to some degree, but they are also often used merely to support policies already developed in the political realm. Fears of the populist effect of polls are exaggerated; polls, in fact, have a positive influence on the discursive quality of parliament. Looking at Parliamentary roles, we find very different patterns of poll use: while MPs oriented towards their constituencies use polls in the most direct and participatory vein, others mediate public opinion as displayed by polls through different institutions (the party, the parliament...

  • Polls as Public–Politic Linkage: A Comparative Analysis of Poll Use and Roles of MPs in Parliamentary Debate
    The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2008
    Co-Authors: Jürgen Petersen, Sibylle Hardmeier, Bruno Wüest
    Abstract:

    Opinion polls as a linkage mechanism between the public and politics have rarely been examined in a Parliamentary context. In our comparative study (Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) we analyse if and how polls are invoked by MPs with different roles in Parliamentary Debates. Focusing on three theoretical aspects (responsiveness, populism and deliberation), we find that polls are indeed invoked to bring the views of the public into Parliamentary Debate to some degree, but they are also often used merely to support policies already developed in the political realm. Fears of the populist effect of polls are exaggerated; polls, in fact, have a positive influence on the discursive quality of parliament. Looking at Parliamentary roles, we find very different patterns of poll use: while MPs oriented towards their constituencies use polls in the most direct and participatory vein, others mediate public opinion as displayed by polls through different institutions (the party, the parliament...

Jürgen Petersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • polls as public politic linkage a comparative analysis of poll use and roles of mps in Parliamentary Debate
    The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2008
    Co-Authors: Jürgen Petersen, Sibylle Hardmeier, Bruno Wüest
    Abstract:

    Opinion polls as a linkage mechanism between the public and politics have rarely been examined in a Parliamentary context. In our comparative study (Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) we analyse if and how polls are invoked by MPs with different roles in Parliamentary Debates. Focusing on three theoretical aspects (responsiveness, populism and deliberation), we find that polls are indeed invoked to bring the views of the public into Parliamentary Debate to some degree, but they are also often used merely to support policies already developed in the political realm. Fears of the populist effect of polls are exaggerated; polls, in fact, have a positive influence on the discursive quality of parliament. Looking at Parliamentary roles, we find very different patterns of poll use: while MPs oriented towards their constituencies use polls in the most direct and participatory vein, others mediate public opinion as displayed by polls through different institutions (the party, the parliament...

  • Polls as Public–Politic Linkage: A Comparative Analysis of Poll Use and Roles of MPs in Parliamentary Debate
    The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2008
    Co-Authors: Jürgen Petersen, Sibylle Hardmeier, Bruno Wüest
    Abstract:

    Opinion polls as a linkage mechanism between the public and politics have rarely been examined in a Parliamentary context. In our comparative study (Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United Kingdom) we analyse if and how polls are invoked by MPs with different roles in Parliamentary Debates. Focusing on three theoretical aspects (responsiveness, populism and deliberation), we find that polls are indeed invoked to bring the views of the public into Parliamentary Debate to some degree, but they are also often used merely to support policies already developed in the political realm. Fears of the populist effect of polls are exaggerated; polls, in fact, have a positive influence on the discursive quality of parliament. Looking at Parliamentary roles, we find very different patterns of poll use: while MPs oriented towards their constituencies use polls in the most direct and participatory vein, others mediate public opinion as displayed by polls through different institutions (the party, the parliament...

Jonathan B. Slapin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Politics of Parliamentary Debate
    2015
    Co-Authors: Sven-oliver Proksch, Jonathan B. Slapin
    Abstract:

    © Sven-Oliver Proksch and Jonathan B. Slapin 2015. Parliamentary Debate is a fundamental aspect of democratic law-making. While law makers everywhere seek to express their views in parliament, there are large discrepancies in who has access to the floor across political systems. This book explains how parties and their members of parliament (MPs) structure Parliamentary Debate. Parties may actively seek to prevent some members from taking the floor while promoting opportunities for others. In doing so, they attempt to control the message that their partisans convey in parliament. The authors provide a theoretical model to explain the design of procedural rules in parliament, how the party leadership interacts with rebel backbenchers, and how MPs represent voters. The book explores political institutions, intra-party politics, electoral politics and legislative behavior. It develops and tests a new theory of Parliamentary Debate, using data from the UK, Germany, New Zealand and the European Parliament

  • The Politics of Parliamentary Debate
    2014
    Co-Authors: Sven-oliver Proksch, Jonathan B. Slapin
    Abstract:

    Parliamentary Debate is a fundamental aspect of democratic law-making. While law makers everywhere seek to express their views in parliament, there are large discrepancies in who has access to the floor across political systems. This book explains how parties and their members of parliament (MPs) structure Parliamentary Debate. Parties may actively seek to prevent some members from taking the floor while promoting opportunities for others. In doing so, they attempt to control the message that their partisans convey in parliament. The authors provide a theoretical model to explain the design of procedural rules in parliament, how the party leadership interacts with rebel backbenchers, and how MPs represent voters. The book explores political institutions, intra-party politics, electoral politics and legislative behavior. It develops and tests a new theory of Parliamentary Debate, using data from the UK, Germany, New Zealand and the European Parliament.

  • The Politics of Parliamentary Debate: Parties, Rebels and Representation
    2014
    Co-Authors: Sven-oliver Proksch, Jonathan B. Slapin
    Abstract:

    Parliamentary Debate is a fundamental aspect of democratic law-making. While law makers everywhere seek to express their views in parliament, there are large discrepancies in who has access to the floor across political systems. This book explains how parties and their members of parliament (MPs) structure Parliamentary Debate. Parties may actively seek to prevent some members from taking the floor while promoting opportunities for others. In doing so, they attempt to control the message that their partisans convey in parliament. The authors provide a theoretical model to explain the design of procedural rules in parliament, how the party leadership interacts with rebel backbenchers, and how MPs represent voters. The book explores political institutions, intra-party politics, electoral politics and legislative behavior. It develops and tests a new theory of Parliamentary Debate, using data from the UK, Germany, New Zealand and the European Parliament.

  • look who s talking Parliamentary Debate in the european union
    European Union Politics, 2010
    Co-Authors: Jonathan B. Slapin, Sven-oliver Proksch
    Abstract:

    Legislative speeches are an important part of Parliamentary activity in the European Parliament (EP). Using a new dataset on EP speeches, this paper offers an explanation for participation in legislative Debates. We argue that floor speeches partially serve as a communication tool between members of parliament, their national parties, and their European political groups. EP group dissidents often go on record by taking the floor when there is a conflict between their national party and their European political group. In this instance, members give speeches for two reasons: to explain their national party’s position to other members of their EP political group, and to create a positive record for themselves in the eyes of the national party to serve their own reelection purposes.

Simone Paolo Ponzetto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • policy preference detection in Parliamentary Debate motions
    Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, 2019
    Co-Authors: Gavin Abercrombie, Federico Nanni, Riza Theresa Batistanavarro, Simone Paolo Ponzetto
    Abstract:

    Debate motions (proposals) tabled in the UK Parliament contain information about the stated policy preferences of the Members of Parliament who propose them, and are key to the analysis of all subsequent speeches given in response to them. We attempt to automatically label Debate motions with codes from a pre-existing coding scheme developed by political scientists for the annotation and analysis of political parties’ manifestos. We develop annotation guidelines for the task of applying these codes to Debate motions at two levels of granularity and produce a dataset of manually labelled examples. We evaluate the annotation process and the reliability and utility of the labelling scheme, finding that inter-annotator agreement is comparable with that of other studies conducted on manifesto data. Moreover, we test a variety of ways of automatically labelling motions with the codes, ranging from similarity matching to neural classification methods, and evaluate them against the gold standard labels. From these experiments, we note that established supervised baselines are not always able to improve over simple lexical heuristics. At the same time, we detect a clear and evident benefit when employing BERT, a state-of-the-art deep language representation model, even in classification scenarios with over 30 different labels and limited amounts of training data.

  • Data from the paper: Policy Preference Detection in Parliamentary Debate Motions
    2019
    Co-Authors: Gavin Abercrombie, Federico Nanni, Riza Theresa Batista-navarro, Simone Paolo Ponzetto
    Abstract:

    Data and annotation guidelines for the paper "Policy Preference Detection in Parliamentary Debate Motions", presented at the 23rd Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning. Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0. https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright-parliament/open-parliament-licence/

Gavin Abercrombie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • policy preference detection in Parliamentary Debate motions
    Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, 2019
    Co-Authors: Gavin Abercrombie, Federico Nanni, Riza Theresa Batistanavarro, Simone Paolo Ponzetto
    Abstract:

    Debate motions (proposals) tabled in the UK Parliament contain information about the stated policy preferences of the Members of Parliament who propose them, and are key to the analysis of all subsequent speeches given in response to them. We attempt to automatically label Debate motions with codes from a pre-existing coding scheme developed by political scientists for the annotation and analysis of political parties’ manifestos. We develop annotation guidelines for the task of applying these codes to Debate motions at two levels of granularity and produce a dataset of manually labelled examples. We evaluate the annotation process and the reliability and utility of the labelling scheme, finding that inter-annotator agreement is comparable with that of other studies conducted on manifesto data. Moreover, we test a variety of ways of automatically labelling motions with the codes, ranging from similarity matching to neural classification methods, and evaluate them against the gold standard labels. From these experiments, we note that established supervised baselines are not always able to improve over simple lexical heuristics. At the same time, we detect a clear and evident benefit when employing BERT, a state-of-the-art deep language representation model, even in classification scenarios with over 30 different labels and limited amounts of training data.

  • Data from the paper: Policy Preference Detection in Parliamentary Debate Motions
    2019
    Co-Authors: Gavin Abercrombie, Federico Nanni, Riza Theresa Batista-navarro, Simone Paolo Ponzetto
    Abstract:

    Data and annotation guidelines for the paper "Policy Preference Detection in Parliamentary Debate Motions", presented at the 23rd Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning. Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0. https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright-parliament/open-parliament-licence/

  • identifying opinion topics and polarity of Parliamentary Debate motions
    Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, 2018
    Co-Authors: Gavin Abercrombie, Riza Theresa Batistanavarro
    Abstract:

    Analysis of the topics mentioned and opinions expressed in Parliamentary Debate motions–or proposals–is difficult for human readers, but necessary for understanding and automatic processing of the content of the subsequent speeches. We present a dataset of Debate motions with pre-existing ‘policy’ labels, and investigate the utility of these labels for simultaneous topic and opinion polarity analysis. For topic detection, we apply one-versus-the-rest supervised topic classification, finding that good performance is achieved in predicting the policy topics, and that textual features derived from the Debate titles associated with the motions are particularly indicative of motion topic. We then examine whether the output could also be used to determine the positions taken by proposers towards the different policies by investigating how well humans agree in interpreting the opinion polarities of the motions. Finding very high levels of agreement, we conclude that the policies used can be reliable labels for use in these tasks, and that successful topic detection can therefore provide opinion analysis of the motions ‘for free’.