Analysis of parliamentary speeches and political-party manifestos has become an integral area of computational study of political texts. While speeches have been overwhelmingly analysed using unsupervised methods, a large corpus of manifestos with by-statement political-stance labels has been created by the participants of the MARPOR project. It has been recently shown that these labels can be predicted by a neural model; however, the current approach relies on provided statement boundaries, limiting out-of-domain applicability. In this work, we propose and test a range of unified split-and-label frameworks -- based on linear-chain CRFs, fine-tuned text-to-text models, and the combination of in-context learning with constrained decoding -- that can be used to jointly segment and classify statements from raw textual data. We show that our approaches achieve competitive accuracy when applied to raw text of political manifestos, and then demonstrate the research potential of our method by applying it to the records of the UK House of Commons and tracing the political trajectories of four major parties in the last three decades.

The quantitative analysis of political ideological positions is a difficult task. In the past, various literature focused on parliamentary voting data of politicians, party manifestos and parliamentary speech to estimate political disagreement and polarization in various political systems. However previous methods of quantitative political analysis suffered from a common challenge which was the amount of data available for analysis. Also previous methods frequently focused on a more general analysis of politics such as overall polarization of the parliament or party-wide political ideological positions. In this paper, we present a method to analyze ideological positions of individual parliamentary representatives by leveraging the latent knowledge of LLMs. The method allows us to evaluate the stance of politicians on an axis of our choice allowing us to flexibly measure the stance of politicians in regards to a topic/controversy of our choice. We achieve this by using a fine-tuned BERT classifier to extract the opinion-based sentences from the speeches of representatives and projecting the average BERT embeddings for each representative on a pair of reference seeds. These reference seeds are either manually chosen representatives known to have opposing views on a particular topic or they are generated sentences which where created using the GPT-4 model of OpenAI. We created the sentences by prompting the GPT-4 model to generate a speech that would come from a politician defending a particular position.

We use GPT-4 to obtain position estimates of political texts in continuous spaces. We develop and validate a new approach by positioning British party manifestos on the economic, social, and immigration policy dimensions and tweets by members of the US Congress on the left-right ideological spectrum. For the party manifestos, the correlation between the positions produced by GPT-4 and experts is 93% or higher, a performance similar to or better than that obtained with crowdsourced position estimates. For individual tweets, the positions obtained with GPT-4 achieve a correlation of 91% with crowdsourced position estimates. For senators of the 117th US Congress, the positions obtained with GPT-4 achieve a correlation of 97% with estimates based on roll call votes and of 96% with those based on campaign funding. Correlations are also substantial within party, indicating that position estimates produced with GPT-4 capture within-party differences between senators. Overall, using GPT-4 for ideological scaling is fast, cost-efficient, and reliable. This approach provides a viable alternative to scaling by both expert raters and crowdsourcing.

The study involved the analysis of emotion-associated language in the UK Conservative and Labour party general election manifestos between 2000 to 2019. While previous research have shown a general correlation between ideological positioning and overlap of public policies, there are still conflicting results in matters of sentiments in such manifestos. Using new data, we present how valence level can be swayed by party status within government with incumbent parties presenting a higher frequency in positive emotion-associated words while negative emotion-associated words are more prevalent in opposition parties. We also demonstrate that parties with ideological similitude use positive language prominently further adding to the literature on the relationship between sentiments and party status.

Annotating costs of large corpora are still one of the main bottlenecks in empirical social science research. On the one hand, making use of the capabilities of domain transfer allows re-using annotated data sets and trained models. On the other hand, it is not clear how well domain transfer works and how reliable the results are for transfer across different dimensions. We explore the potential of domain transfer across geographical locations, languages, time, and genre in a large-scale database of political manifestos. First, we show the strong within-domain classification performance of fine-tuned transformer models. Second, we vary the genre of the test set across the aforementioned dimensions to test for the fine-tuned models' robustness and transferability. For switching genres, we use an external corpus of transcribed speeches from New Zealand politicians while for the other three dimensions, custom splits of the Manifesto database are used. While BERT achieves the best scores in the initial experiments across modalities, DistilBERT proves to be competitive at a lower computational expense and is thus used for further experiments across time and country. The results of the additional analysis show that (Distil)BERT can be applied to future data with similar performance. Moreover, we observe (partly) notable differences between the political manifestos of different countries of origin, even if these countries share a language or a cultural background.

In postwar Germany, the federal government is usually formed by several political parties (Schmidt, 2007, p. 97). Over the past 16 years, these government coalitions were led by the Christian Democratic parliamentary group (CDU/CSU), most recently in cooperation with the Social Democratic Party (SPD), which, following the federal election in 2021, was unwilling to negotiate with their former partner, calling for new alliances to achieve a majority in parliament. Finally, the leaders of the Free Democratic Party (FDP), the Greens and SPD, despite mixed support from the party bases, signed a coalition agreement. Some journalists even regarded the FDP, which gained access to two key ministries, the secret winner of the negotiations (Fürstenau, 2021), also because the Greens did not see some of their desired climate change policies implemented (Lauter, 2021). In this research, we are interested in how the coalition agreement was assembled regarding the individual party contributions. To that end, we utilize methods from Natural Language Processing, which have seen widespread adoption in political science (Wilkerson and Casas, 2017; Merz et al., 2016; Rauh, 2015; Slapin and Proksch, 2008).

Even though fine-tuned neural language models have been pivotal in enabling "deep" automatic text analysis, optimizing text representations for specific applications remains a crucial bottleneck. In this study, we look at this problem in the context of a task from computational social science, namely modeling pairwise similarities between political parties. Our research question is what level of structural information is necessary to create robust text representation, contrasting a strongly informed approach (which uses both claim span and claim category annotations) with approaches that forgo one or both types of annotation with document structure-based heuristics. Evaluating our models on the manifestos of German parties for the 2021 federal election. We find that heuristics that maximize within-party over between-party similarity along with a normalization step lead to reliable party similarity prediction, without the need for manual annotation.