Polarized, but How? Foundation of Polarization in Parliamentary Speech

• In Event: New Methods for Text-as-Data

Abstract

The expression of conflict and compromise are central to the functioning of representative democratic institutions, especially in parliamentary debate. Several innovations in text-as-data methods enable insights into long-term trends of parliamentary polarization (Jensen et al., 2012; Lauderdale & Herzog, 2016; Peterson & Spirling, 2018). Yet, we know relatively little about the concrete rhetorical patterns in which polarization manifests in political speech. Our study aims at closing this gap by disentangling the positional and non-positional foundations of polarization in parliamentary speech. We conduct a comparative quantitative content analysis of parliamentary speech in historical and political contexts where aggregate-level measurements obtained with text-based machine learning methods indicate different levels of polarization. Our analyses demonstrate that in addition to policy-centered statements about legislators' stances and priorities, polarization often manifests in non-positional rhetoric that involves criticism and appraisal of actors' valence attributes. We conclude that conceptions and measurement strategies that focus exclusively on policy-centered conflict are insufficient to capture the multifaceted nature of parliamentary polarization. Our findings have implications for the quantitative, text-based study of polarization and our understanding of the working of representative democracy.

Authors

• Hauke Licht, University of Innsbruck

• Sven-Oliver Proksch, University of Cologne