Cited by 166Computational and Text Analysis MethodsElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Understanding Wordscores

Open access
Lowe, Will·2008·Political Analysis

Abstract

Wordscores is a widely used procedure for inferring policy positions, or scores, for new documents on the basis of scores for words derived from documents with known scores. It is computationally straightforward, requires no distributional assumptions, but has unresolved practical and theoretical problems. In applications, estimated document scores are on the wrong scale and the theoretical development does not specify a statistical model, so it is unclear what assumptions the method makes about political text and how to tell whether they fit particular text analysis applications. The first part of the paper demonstrates that badly scaled document score estimates reflect deeper problems with the method. The second part shows how to understand Wordscores as an approximation to correspondence analysis which itself approximates a statistical ideal point model for words. Problems with the method are identified with the conditions under which these layers of approximation fail to ensure consistent and unbiased estimation of the parameters of the ideal point model.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/pan/mpn004

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lowe, W.
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Lowe, Will
Venue
Political Analysis
Published
2008
Volume
16
Issue
4
Pages
356-371
ISSN
  • 1047-1987 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4989
OpenAlex
W4243557737
Cited by
166
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 7
FWCI
26.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Political Analysis (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • MADOC (University of Mannheim) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
Wordscores, document scoring, correspondence analysis, ideal point model, scale estimation, estimation bias, political text analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review