Modeling polarizing topics: When do different political communities respond differently to the same news

ICWSM 2012 - Proceedings of the 6th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 18-25

  Balasubramanyan, Ramnath ^a   Cohen, William W ^a   Pierce, Doug ^b   Redlawsk, David P ^b  

^a Carnegie Mellon University ^*  (United States)

^b Rutgers University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNITY RESPONSE; DEGREE OF POLARIZATION; LATENT VARIABLE MODELING; LATENT VARIABLE MODELS; LEVEL OF INTEREST; POLITICAL BLOGS; POLITICAL DISCOURSE; SEMI-SUPERVISED;

CASE BASED REASONING; FORECASTING; INTERNET; POLARIZATION; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

SOCIAL SCIENCES;

EID: 84890577360     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Baccianella, A. E. S., and Sebastiani, F. 2010. Sentiwordnet 3.0: An enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In Proceedings of the Seventh conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'10). Valletta, Malta: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
2. Balasubramanyan, R.; Cohen, W. W.; Pierce, D.; and Redlawsk, D. P. 2011. What pushes their buttons? predicting comment polarity from the content of political blog posts. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Language in Social Media (LSM 2011), 12-19. Portland, Oregon: Association for Computational Linguistics.
3. Blei, D., and McAuliffe, J. 2008. Supervised Topic Models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 121-128.
4. Blei, D. M.; Ng, A. Y.; and Jordan, M. I. 2003. Latent dirichlet allocation. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:993-1022.
5. Huang, L.-N., and Price, V. 2001. Motivations, goals, information search, and memory about political candidates. Political Psychology 22(4):pp. 665-692.
6. Isbell, L. M.; Ottati, V. C.; and Bruns, K. C. 2006. Affect and politics: Effects on judgment, processing, and information seeking. In Redlawsk, D., ed., Feeling Politics: Emotion in Political Information Processing. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.
7. Kim, S.-y.; Taber, C. S.; and Lodge, M. 2008. A Computational Model of the Citizen as Motivated Reasoner: Modeling the Dynamics of the 2000 Presidential Election. SSRN eLibrary.
8. Lodge, M., and Taber, C. 2000. Three Steps toward a Theory of Motivated Political Reasoning. Cambridge University Press.
9. O'Connor, B.; Balasubramanyan, R.; Routledge, B. R.; and Smith, N. A. 2010. From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
10. Redlawsk, D. P. 2002. Hot cognition or cool consideration? testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. The Journal of Politics 64(04):1021-1044.
11. Redlawsk, D. 2006. Motivated reasoning, affect, and the role of memory in voter decision-making. In Redlawsk, D., ed., Feeling Politics: Emotion in Political Information Processing. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan.
12. Tumasjan, A.; Sprenger, T. O.; Sandner, P. G.; and Welpe, I. M. 2010. Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In Cohen, W.W., and Gosling, S., eds., ICWSM. The AAAI Press.
13. Turney, P. D. 2002. Thumbs up or thumbs down?: semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL '02, 417-424. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
14. Yano, T.; Cohen, W.; and Smith, N. A. 2009. Predicting response to political blog posts with topic models. In Proceedings of the North American Association for Computational Linguistics Human Language Technologies Conference.