Compara mètodes
Revisa els mètodes seleccionats l'un al costat de l'altre; les files que difereixen es ressalten.
| Wordfish Scaling× | Ideal Point Estimation× | |
|---|---|---|
| Camp | Political Science | Political Science |
| Família | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Any d'origen≠ | 2008 | 2004 |
| Autor original≠ | Jonathan Slapin and Sven-Oliver Proksch | Clinton, Jackman & Rivers (Bayesian formulation); Poole & Rosenthal (spatial tradition) |
| Tipus≠ | Unsupervised latent-position model for word-count data | Latent-variable spatial model of binary choice data |
| Font seminal≠ | Slapin, J. B., & Proksch, S.-O. (2008). A Scaling Model for Estimating Time-Series Party Positions from Texts. American Journal of Political Science, 52(3), 705–722. DOI ↗ | Clinton, J., Jackman, S., & Rivers, D. (2004). The Statistical Analysis of Roll Call Data. American Political Science Review, 98(2), 355–370. DOI ↗ |
| Àlies | Wordfish text scaling, Poisson scaling of texts, Unsupervised text scaling, Wordfish position estimation | Ideal point model, Item response theory for roll calls, Spatial voting model, Bayesian ideal points |
| Relacionats | 4 | 4 |
| Resum≠ | Wordfish scaling is an unsupervised text-as-data method that estimates a single latent position for each political document — a party manifesto, a legislative speech, a press release — directly from its word frequencies, without any reference texts or hand coding. Introduced by Slapin and Proksch in 2008, it models word counts as draws from a Poisson distribution whose rate depends on a document position and word-specific parameters, recovering, for example, a left–right ordering of parties purely from how often each word appears in each text. | Ideal point estimation recovers the latent policy positions — ideal points — of political actors from their observed binary choices, most often legislators' yea/nay votes on roll calls. Building on the spatial theory of voting and formalized as a Bayesian item-response model by Clinton, Jackman, and Rivers in 2004, it places each legislator and each bill in a low-dimensional policy space and estimates positions so that the probability a legislator votes yea increases as the bill's 'yea' outcome moves closer to that legislator's ideal point. |
| ScholarGateConjunt de dades ↗ |
|
|