Advertisement

Quality & Quantity

, Volume 51, Issue 3, pp 1279–1296 | Cite as

Rhetorical manifestation of institutional transformation

Comparing and contrasting different approaches for content analysis: the case of consumers protection in TLC sector in Italy
  • Stefano SbalchieroEmail author
  • Maria Stella Righettini
Article

Abstract

The present study proposes an analysis process to compare and contrast different approaches to content analysis. Moving from previous findings (Righettini and Sbalchiero, ICPP—international conference on public policy, 2015), related to consumer protection in the annual speeches of Italian Presidents of AGCOM, delivered between 2000 and 2015, statistical analyses of textual data are applied on the same set of texts in order to compare and contrast results and evaluate the opportunity of integrating different approaches to enrich the results. This review of results resorts to topic based methods for classification of context units (Reinert, Les Cah l’Anal Donnees 8(2):187–198, 1983), text clustering and lexical correspondence analysis (Lebart et al., Exploring textual data, 1998) in a general framework of content analysis and “lexical worlds” exploration (Reinert, Lang Soc 66:5–39, 1993), i.e., the identification of main topics and words used by AGCOM Presidents to talk about consumer protection. Results confirm the strengths and opportunities of topics detection approach and shed light on how quantitative methods might become useful to political scientists when available policy documents increase in number and size. One methodological innovation of this article is that it supplements the use of word categories in traditional content analysis with an automated topics analysis which exceeds the problems of reliability, replicability, and inferential circularity.

Keywords

Text clustering Topic detection Correspondence analysis Policy change Institutional leadership Independent regulatory agencies 

References

  1. Bara, J., Weale, A., et al.: Analysing parliamentary debate with computer assistance. Swiss Polit. Sci. Rev. 13(4), 577–605 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumgartner, F.R., Jones, B.D., Mortensen, P.B.: Punctuated equilibrium theory: explaining stability and change in public policymaking. In: Sabatier, P.A., Weible, C.M. (eds.) Theories of the Policy Process, pp. 59–103. Westview Press, Boulder (2014)Google Scholar
  3. Berelson, B.: Content Analysis in Communication Research. The Free Press, Glencoe (1950)Google Scholar
  4. Bernard, H.R., Ryan, G.W.: Analyzing Qualitative Data: Systematic Approaches. Sage, Los Angeles (2010)Google Scholar
  5. Berry, M.W. (ed.): Survey of Text Mining. Clustering, Classification, and Retrieval. Springer, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  6. Bolasco, S.: L’analisi automatica dei testi. Fare ricerca con il text mining. Carocci, Rome (2013)Google Scholar
  7. Bolasco, S., Galli de’ Paratesi, N., Giuliano, L.: Parole in libertà. Un’analisi statistica e linguistica. Manifestolibri, Roma (2006)Google Scholar
  8. Bolasco, S., Baiocchi, F., Morrone, A.: Taltac2: Trattamento Automatico Lessicale e Testuale per l’Analisi del Contenuto di un Corpus [Lexical and Textual Automatic Treatment for Content Analysis of a Corpus] (ver.: 2.8.0.2) [software]. Rome. http://www.taltac.it (2010). Accessed Dec 2015
  9. Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3(2), 77–101 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bryman, A., Burgess, R.G. (eds.): Analyzing Qualitative Data. Routledge, London (1994)Google Scholar
  11. Caeser, J.W.: Rhetorical presidency revisited. In: Marc, K.L. (ed.) Modern Presidents and the Presidency, pp. 15–34. Lexington Books, Lexington (1985)Google Scholar
  12. Corbetta, P.: Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Il Mulino, Bologna (1999)Google Scholar
  13. Cortelazzo, M.A., Gambarotto, F. (eds.): Parole, economia, storia. I discorsi dei presidenti di Confindustria dal 1945 al 2011. Marsilio, Venezia (2013)Google Scholar
  14. Cortelazzo, M.A., Tuzzi, A. (eds.): Messaggi dal Colle. I discorsi di fine anno dei presidenti della Repubblica. Marsilio, Venezia (2007)Google Scholar
  15. Cortelazzo, M.A., Nadalutti P., Tuzzi A.: Improving Labbé’s intertextual distance: testing a revised version on a large corpus of Italian literature. J. Quant. Linguist. 20(2), 125–152 (2013). doi: 10.1080/09296174.2013.773138. ISSN 0929-6174
  16. Creswell, J.W.: Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River (2002)Google Scholar
  17. Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)Google Scholar
  18. Creswell, J.W.: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 4th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2013)Google Scholar
  19. Edwards, G.C.: The Public Presidency: The Pursuit of Popular Support. St. Martin’s, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  20. Everitt, B.: Cluster Analysis. Halsted Press, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  21. Green, B.F.: The general inquirer: a computer approach to content analysis. Book review. Am. Educ. Res. J. 4(4), 397–398 (1967)Google Scholar
  22. Greenacre, M.J.: Theory and Application of Correspondence Analysis. Academic, London (1984)Google Scholar
  23. Greenacre, M.J.: Correspondence Analysis in Practice. Chapman and Hall, London (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grieve, J.: Quantitative authorship attribution: an evaluation of techniques. Lit. Linguist. Comput. 22(3), 251–270 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hall, P.A.: Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comp. polit. 275–296 (1993)Google Scholar
  26. Hart, R.P.: The Sound of Leadership: Presidential Communication in the Modern Age. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1987)Google Scholar
  27. Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Turner, L.A.: Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mixed Methods Res. 1(2), 112–133 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kernell, S.: Going Public: New Strategies in Presidential Leadership. Congressional Quarterly, Washington, DC (1997)Google Scholar
  29. Koppel, M., Schler, J., Argamon, S.: Computational methods in authorship attribution. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 60, 9–29 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Krippendorff, K.: Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology. Sage, Beverly Hills (1980)Google Scholar
  31. Labbé, D.: Experiments on authorship attribution by intertextual distance in English. J. Quant. Linguist. 14, 33–80 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Labbé, C., Labbé, D.: Inter-textual distance and authorship attribution Corneille and Moliére. J. Quant. Linguist. 8, 213–231 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lasswell, H.D., Casey, R.D., Smith, B.L.: Propaganda and Promotional Activities; An Annotated Bibliography. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis (1935)Google Scholar
  34. Lasswell, H.D., et al.: The politically significant content of the press: coding procedures. Journal. Q. 19(1), 12–23 (1942)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lasswell, H.D., Leites, N., et al.: Language of Politics: Studies in Quantitative Semantics. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1949)Google Scholar
  36. Laver, M.: Party policy in Britain, 1997: results from an expert survey. Polit. Stud. 46(3), 336–347 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lebart, L., Morineau, A., Warwick, K.M.: Multivariate Descriptive Statistical Analysis. Correspondence Analysis and Related Techniques for Large Matrices. Wiley, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  38. Lebart, L., Salem, A., Berry, L.: Exploring Textual Data. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lowi, T.J.: The Personal President, Power Invested, Promises Unfulfilled. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1985)Google Scholar
  40. Maggetti, M.: The media accountability of independent regulatory agencies. Eur. Polit. Sci. Rev. 4(3), 385–408 (2012)Google Scholar
  41. Marchand, P., Ratinaud, P.: L’analyse de similitude appliquée aux corpus textuels: les primaires socialistes pour l’élection présidentielle française (septembre–octobre 2011). In: Actes des 11eme Journées internationales d’Analyse statistique des Données Textuelles. JADT 2012, pp. 687–699. Liège, Belgique (2012)Google Scholar
  42. Maxwell, J.A.: Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2012)Google Scholar
  43. Muller, C., Brunet, E.: La statistique r ´esout-elle les probl‘emes d’attribution?? Strumenti critici 3(3), 367–387 (1988)Google Scholar
  44. Murtagh, F.: Correspondence Analysis and Data Coding with Java and R. Chapman and Hall/CRC, London (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pauli, F., Tuzzi, A.: The end of year addresses of the presidents of the Italian Republic (1948–2006): discoursal similarities and differences. Glottometrics 18, 40–51 (2009)Google Scholar
  46. Peters, B.G.: Institutional Theory and Political Science. The New Institutionalism, Bloomsbury, Continuum (2011)Google Scholar
  47. Peters, B.G.: Governance as political theory. In: Levy-Faur, D (ed.) Oxford Handbook of Governance, pp. 19–32. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012)Google Scholar
  48. Popescu, I., Mačutek, J., Altmann, G.: Aspects of Word Frequencies. Studies in Quantitative Linguistics. RAM-Verlag, Ludenscheid (2009)Google Scholar
  49. R Development Core Team: R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Ver. 2.8.1) [Software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.r-project.org (2010). Accessed Dec 2015
  50. Ratinaud, P.: IRaMuTeQ: Interface de R pour les Analyses Multidimensionnelles de Textes et de Questionnaires. www.iramuteq.org (2009). Accessed Dec 2015
  51. Ratinaud, P., Déjean, S.: IRaMuTeQ: implémentation de la méthode ALCESTE d’analyse de texte dans un logiciel libre. Modélisation Appliquée aux Sciences Humaines et Sociales (MASHS2009). Le Mirail, Toulouse (2009)Google Scholar
  52. Ratinaud, P., Marchand, P.: Application de la méthode ALCESTE à de “gros” corpus et stabilité des “mondes lexicaux”: analyse du “CableGate” avec IRaMuTeQ. In: Actes des 11eme Journées internationales d’Analyse statistique des Données Textuelles, pp. 835–844. Liège, Belgique (2012)Google Scholar
  53. Reinert, M.: Une methode de classification descendante hierarchique: application a l’analyse lexicale par contexte. Les Cah. l’Anal. Donnees 8(2), 187–198 (1983)Google Scholar
  54. Reinert, M.: Alceste, une méthodologie d’analyse des données textuelles et une application: Aurélia de Gérard de Nerval. Bull. Méthodol. Sociol. 26, 24–54 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Reinert, M.: Les «mondes lexicaux» et leur «logique» à travers l’analyse statistiqued’un corpus de récits de cauchemars. Lang. Soc. 66, 5–39 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Reinert, M.: Quelques interrogations à propos de l’«objet» d’une analyse de discours de type statistique et de la réponse «Alceste». Lang. Soc. 90, 57–70 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Reinert, M.: Alceste, une méthode statistique et sémiotique d’analyse de discours. Application aux «Rêveries du promeneur solitaire». La Rev. Française Psychiatrie Psychol. Méd. Tome V, 49(10/2001), 32–36 (2001)Google Scholar
  58. Righettini, M.S., Nesti, G.: Indipendenza e credibilità. Istituzioni, imprese e consumatori nella regolazione, Roma, Carocci (2014)Google Scholar
  59. Righettini M.S., Sbalchiero, S.: A discursive approach to regulation between continuity and change. The case of consumer protection in telecommunications. In: ICPP—International Conference on Public Policy, Milan (2015)Google Scholar
  60. Roberts, C.W.: A conceptual framework for quantitative text analysis. Qual. Quant. 34, 259–274 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rudman, J.: The state of authorship attribution studies: some problems and solutions. Comput. Humanit. 31, 351–365 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sbalchiero, S., Tuzzi, A.: Scientists’ spirituality in scientists’ words. Assessing and enriching the results of a qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews by means of quantitative approaches. Qual. Quant. (2015). doi: 10.1007/s11135-015-0208-y. ISSN 0033-5177
  63. Schmidt, V.A.: Democracy and discourse in an integrating Europe and a globalising world. Eur. Law. J. 6, 277–300 (2000). doi: 10.1111/1468-0386.00108
  64. Schmidt, V.A.: Taking ideas and discourse seriously; explaining change through discursive institutionalism as the fourth ‘new institutionalism’. Eur. Polit. Sci. Rev. 2(1), 1–25 (2010)Google Scholar
  65. Schonhardt-Bailey, C.: Measuring ideas more effectively: an analysis of Bush and Kerry’s national security speeches. Polit. Sci. Polit. 38(3), 701–711 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Smith, R.M.: The timing of presidential speeches: Can the president be an effective teacher? In: Robert, Y.S., Martha, J.K., Lawrence, R.J. (eds.) Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-First Century, pp. 78–104. Columbia University Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  67. Stamatatos, E.: A survey of modern authorship attribution methods. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 60, 538–556 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Stone, P.J.: Thematic text analysis: new agendas for analyzing text content. In: Roberts, C.W. (ed.) Text Analysis for the Social Sciences: Methods for Drawing Statistical Inferences from Texts and Transcripts, pp. 35–54. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah (1997)Google Scholar
  69. Stone, P.J., Dexter, C.D., Marshall, S.S., Daniel, M.O.: The General Inquirer: A Computer Approach to Content Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge (1966)Google Scholar
  70. Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research. Sage, Newbury Park (1990)Google Scholar
  71. Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (eds.): Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2003)Google Scholar
  72. Tulis, J.K.: The Rhetorical Presidency. Chatham House, Chatham (1987)Google Scholar
  73. Tulis, J.K.: Revisiting the rhetorical presidency. In: Martin, J.M. (ed.) Beyond the Rhetorical Presidency, pp. 3–14. Texas A&M University Press, College Station (1996)Google Scholar
  74. Tulis, J.K.: Reflections on the rhetorical presidency in American political development. In: Richard, J.E. (ed.) Speaking to the People: The Rhetorical Presidency in Historical Perspective, pp. 211–222. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst (1998)Google Scholar
  75. Tuzzi, A.: What to put in the bag? Comparing and contrasting procedures for text clustering. Ital. J. Appl. Stat. Stat. Appl. 22(1), 77–94 (2010)Google Scholar
  76. Tuzzi, A.: Reinhard Köhler’s scientific production: words, numbers and pictures. In: Naumann, S., Grzybek, P., Vulanović, R., Altmann, G. (eds.) Synergetic Linguistics. Text and Language as Dynamic Systems, pp. 223–242. Praesens Verlag, Vienna (2012)Google Scholar
  77. Tuzzi, A., Popescu, I.-I., Altmann, G.: Quantitative Analysis of Italian Texts. RAM-Verlag, Lüdenscheid (2010)Google Scholar
  78. Weber, R.P.: Basic Content Analysis. Sage, Beverly Hills (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political Science, Law and International Relations (SPGI)University of PadovaPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations