Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
publishedVersion
Publication Date
3-2007
Abstract
Budge and Pennings (2007) criticize the “Wordscores” method for computerized content analysis on essentially two grounds. The first is that the best test of Wordscores accuracy is whether it can “reproduce the rich time series produced by the MRG/CMP covering a 50 year period” (Budge and Pennings, 2007: 5), which Budge and Pennings claim it does not do. The second is that Wordscores time series estimates, as implemented by Budge and Pennings, yield very little variation around mean scores for the entire time series. In this brief response we make three simple points.
Discipline
Models and Methods | Political Science
Research Areas
Political Science
Publication
Electoral Studies
Volume
26
Issue
1
First Page
130
Last Page
135
ISSN
0261-3794
Identifier
10.1016/j.electstud.2006.04.001
Publisher
Elsevier
Citation
BENOIT, Kenneth, & LAVER, Michael.(2007). Benchmarks for text analysis: A response to Budge and Pennings. Electoral Studies, 26(1), 130-135.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3977
Copyright Owner and License
Publisher
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2006.04.001