ScholarGate
Assistant

Comparer des méthodes

Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.

Wordfish Scaling×Ideal Point Estimation×
DomainePolitical SciencePolitical Science
FamilleLatent structureLatent structure
Année d'origine20082004
Auteur d'origineJonathan Slapin and Sven-Oliver ProkschClinton, Jackman & Rivers (Bayesian formulation); Poole & Rosenthal (spatial tradition)
TypeUnsupervised latent-position model for word-count dataLatent-variable spatial model of binary choice data
Source fondatriceSlapin, 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 ↗
AliasWordfish text scaling, Poisson scaling of texts, Unsupervised text scaling, Wordfish position estimationIdeal point model, Item response theory for roll calls, Spatial voting model, Bayesian ideal points
Apparentées44
RésuméWordfish 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.
ScholarGateJeu de données
  1. v1
  2. 3 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED

Aller à la recherche Télécharger les diapositives

ScholarGateComparer des méthodes: Wordfish Scaling · Ideal Point Estimation. Consulté le 2026-06-24 sur https://scholargate.app/fr/compare