Lexical shifts, substantive changes, and continuity in State of the Union discourse, 1790-2014

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 112, Issue 35, 2015, Pages 10837-10844

  Rule, Alix ^a   Cointet, Jean Philippe ^b   Bearman, Peter S ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b University ofParis Est   (France)

Author keywords

American history; Natural language processing; Networks; State of the Union; Text analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COURT; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; LANGUAGE; MODERN TIMES; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; PHYLOGENY; POLICY; POLITICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; UNITED STATES; WAR;

EID: 84940991770     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1512221112     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Tulis J (1987) The Rhetorical Presidency (Princeton Univ Press, Princeton).
2. Cohen JE (1995) Presidential rhetoric and the public agenda. Am J Pol Sci 39(1):87-107.
3. Hill KQ (1998) The policy agendas of the president and the mass public: A research validation and extension. Am J Pol Sci 42(4):1328-1334.
4. Edwards GC, Wood BD (1999) Who influences whom? The President, Congress, and the media. Am Polit Sci Rev 93(02):327-344.
5. Zarefsky D (2008) Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation. Argumentation 22(3):317-330.
6. Bimes T, Mulroy Q (2004) The rise and decline of presidential populism. Stud Am Polit Dev 18(2):136-159.
7. Lazar A, Lazar MM (2004) The discourse of the new world order: Out-casting the double face of threat. Discourse Soc 15(2-3):223-242.
8. Teten RL (2003) Evolution of the modern rhetorical presidency: Presidential presentation and development of the State of the Union address. Pres Stud Q 33(2):333-346.
9. Laracey M (2009) The rhetorical presidency today: How does it stand up? Pres Stud Q 39(4):908-931.
10. Mohr JW (2013) Graphing the grammar of motives in U.S. national security strategies: Cultural interpretation, automated text analysis and the drama of global politics. Poetics 41(6):670-700.
11. Callon M, Courtial JP, Laville F (1991) Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics 22(1):155-205.
12. Cancho RF, Solé RV (2001) The small world of human language. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 268(1482):2261-2265.
13. Grimmer J, Stewart BM (2013) Text as data: The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Polit Anal 21(3):267-297.
14. Klingenstein S, Hitchcock T, DeDeo S (2014) The civilizing process in London's Old Bailey. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111(26):9419-9424.
15. Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI (2003) Latent dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn Res 3:993-1022.
16. Chuang J, Ramage D, Manning C, Heer J (2012) Interpretation and trust: Designing model-driven visualizations for text analysis. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), pp 443-452.
17. th Annual Conference on Digital Libraries (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), pp 215-224.
18. Mimno D, Blei D (2011) Bayesian checking for topic models. Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA), pp 227-237.
19. st International Conference on Machine Learning (Journal of Machine Learning Research, Microtome Publishing, Brookline, MA), Vol 32.
20. Schmidt BM (2012) Words alone: Dismantling topic models in the humanities. Journal of Digital Humanities 2(1):49-65.
21. nd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, eds Xing EP, Jebara T (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), pp 50-57.
22. st International Conference on Machine Learning (Journal of Machine Learning Research, Microtome Publishing, Brookline, MA), Vol 32.
23. th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (AUAI Press, Arlington, VI), pp 487-494.
24. Wang C, Blei D, Heckerman D (2012) Continuous time dynamic topic models. arXiv: 1206.3298.
25. th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (ACM, New York), pp 424-433.
26. rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ACM, New York), pp 113-120.
27. th International Conference, eds Cook D, Pei J, Wang W, ZaÏane O, Wu X (IEEE and CPS Conference Publishing Services, Los Alamitos, CA), pp 1056-1061.
28. Palla G, Barabási AL, Vicsek T (2007) Quantifying social group evolution. Nature 446(7136):664-667.
29. Hopcroft J, Khan O, Kulis B, Selman B (2004) Tracking evolving communities in large linked networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101(Suppl 1):5249-5253.
30. Rosvall M, Bergstrom CT (2008) Maps of random walks on complex networks reveal community structure. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(4):1118-1123.
31. Mucha PJ, Richardson T, Macon K, Porter MA, Onnela JP (2010) Community structure in time-dependent, multiscale, and multiplex networks. Science 328(5980):876-878.
32. Chavalarias D, Cointet JP (2013) Phylomemetic patterns in science evolution - the rise and fall of scientific fields. PLoS One 8(2):e54847.
33. Weeds J, Weir D (2005) Co-occurrence retrieval: A flexible framework for lexical distributional similarity. Comput Linguist 31(4):439-475.
34. Blondel VD, Guillaume JL, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech 2008(10):10008.
35. Brodsky A (2000) Grover Cleveland: A Study in Character (MacMillan, New York).
36. Hollinger DA (1989) In the American Province: Studies in the History and Historiography of Ideas (JHU Press, Baltimore).
37. Rodgers DT (1998) Atlantic crossings (Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, MA).
38. Weinstein J (1968) The Corporate Ideal in the Liberal State, 1900-1918 (Beacon Press, Boston), pp 105-110.
39. Schmid H (1995) Treetagger: A language independent part-of-speech tagger. Institut fr Maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung. Universitas (Stuttg) 43:28.
40. Salton G, Buckley C (1988) Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Inf Process Manage 24(5):513-523.
41. Bordag S (2008) A comparison of co-occurrence and similarity measures as simulations of context. Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, ed Gelbukh A (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg), Vol 4919, pp 52-63.