nach oben

Sexuality Research and Social Policy

Erschienen in:

18.01.2022

Neutral or Framed? A Sentiment Analysis of 2019 Abortion Laws

verfasst von: Danny Valdez, Patricia Goodson

Erschienen in: Sexuality Research and Social Policy | Ausgabe 3/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Introduction

This study employs sentiment analysis (SA) to examine the semantic structures of restrictive and protective abortion bills enacted in 2019. SA is a Natural Language Processing (NLP) technique that uses automation to extract affective indicators (emotive language) from text data. Assessing these indicators can help identify whether legal texts are framed, or intentionally biased in their wording. Identifying framing is important for understanding potentially biased interpretations of these laws.

Methods

We identified a sample of 2019 abortion bills using the legislative tracking tool Legiscan and included those that met specified criteria (N = 19 bills). We categorized each bill as restrictive (n = 12) or protective (n = 7). We ran aggregate (i.e., all bills) and separate (protective × restrictive) SA, generating scores that we interpreted qualitatively (higher scores indicated predominance of positive wording).

Results

In the aggregate analysis, 56% of text comprised negative terms (44% positive). Restrictive bills contained more negative language than protective bills (67% vs 58%). Although SA scores varied from −222 to +13, two laws scored 0, indicating neutrality. For comparison, the US Constitution’s score equaled 1.

Conclusion

Our findings confirm SA is useful to examine legal documents for language biases. The abortion bills we assessed seem framed along political ideologies, although the sample provided evidence that neutral wording is possible.

Policy Implications

With the recent additions of conservative-leaning Justices to the US Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade is again at the center of partisan conflict. Thus, how abortion laws are framed draws further implications for how they may be interpreted when challenged in the court system.

Vorheriger Artikel Associations Between Sex Education Types and Sexual Behaviors Among Female Adolescents: a Secondary Data Analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth 2011–2019

Nächster Artikel Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights: a Sociodemographic Profile of Primary Healthcare Professionals in the City of São Paulo and Their Perceptions on the Issue

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

About NRLC | National Right to Life. (2021). Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://www.nrlc.org/about/

Bathina, K. C., Ten Thij, M., Lorenzo-Luaces, L., Rutter, L. A., & Bollen, J. (2021). Individuals with depression express more distorted thinking on social media. Nature Human Behaviour, 1–9 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01050-7

Beatty, P. C., & Willis, G. B. (2007). Research synthesis: The practice of cognitive interviewing. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfm006CrossRef

Blei, D. M., Ng, A., & Jordan, M. (2003). Latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 30.

Bollen, J., Ten Thij, M., Breithaupt, F., Barron, A. T. J., Rutter, L. A., Lorenzo-Luaces, L., & Scheffer, M. (2021). Historical language records reveal a surge of cognitive distortions in recent decades. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(30). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2102061118

Cambria, E., Schuller, B., Xia, Y., & Havasi, C. (2013). New avenues in opinion mining and sentiment analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 28(2), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2013.30CrossRef

Cao, J., Zeng, K., Wang, H., Cheng, J., Qiao, F., Wen, D., & Gao, Y. (2014). Web-based traffic sentiment analysis: Methods and applications. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 15(2), 844–853. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2013.2291241CrossRef

Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054CrossRef

Dias, E., & Williams, T. (2019, February 8). Anti-abortion activists still see their best chance in years to chip away at Roe v. Wade. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/us/anti-abortion-activists-roe-v-wade.html

Druckman, J. N. (2004). Priming the vote: Campaign effects in a U.S. Senate election. Political Psychology, 25(4), 577–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00388.x

Fang, R., Pouyanfar, S., Yang, Y., Chen, S.-C., & Iyengar, S. S. (2016). Computational health informatics in the Big Data age: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 49(1), 12:1–12:36. https://doi.org/10.1145/2932707

Feick, L., Donnay, K., & McCabe, K. T. (2021). The subconscious effect of subtle media bias on perceptions of terrorism. American Politics Research, 49(3), 313–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X20972105CrossRef

Feldman, R. (2013). Techniques and applications for sentiment analysis. Techniques and Applications for Sentiment Analysis, 56(4), 82–89.

Gambrill, E., & Reiman, A. (2011). A propaganda index for reviewing problem framing in articles and manuscripts: An exploratory study. PLoS One, 6(5), e19516. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019516CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gibson, J. L., & Nelson, M. J. (2014). The legitimacy of the US Supreme Court: Conventional wisdoms and recent challenges thereto. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 10(1), 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110413-030546CrossRef

Hutto, C., & Gilbert, E. (2014). VADER: A parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 8(1), Article 1. https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14550

Kang, M. S., & Shepherd, J. (2010). The partisan price of justice: An empirical analysis of campaign contributions and judicial decisions [SSRN Scholarly Paper]. Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1649402

Knopp, J. L. (2013). The unconstitutionality of Ohio’s House Bill 125: The Heartbeat Bill. Akron Law Review, 46, 35.

Kotsiantis, S. B. (2007). Supervised machine learning: A review of classification techniques. 20.

Lehr, D., & Ohm, P. (2017). Playing with the Data: What Legal Scholars Should Learn about Machine Learning., 51, 65.

Litman, L. (2020). Redefifining reproductive rights and justice. Michigan Law Review. https://doi.org/10.3316/agispt.20200527030916

McKeegan, M. (1993). The politics of abortion: A historical perspective. Women’s health issues: official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women’s Health, 3(3), 127–131.CrossRef

Mukherjee, S., & Bhattacharyya, P. (2012). Feature specific sentiment analysis for product reviews. In A. Gelbukh (Ed.), Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing, 7181, 475–487. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28604-9_39

NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation. (2012, February 21). America’s charities. https://www.charities.org/charities/naral-pro-choice-america-foundation

Nash, E. (2019). Abortion rights in peril—What clinicians need to know. New England Journal of Medicine, 381(6), 497–499. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1906972CrossRefPubMed

Oliver, M. B., Raney, A. A., & Bryant, J. (Eds.). (2019). Media effects (Fourth edition). Routledge.

PEW Research Group, & Inquiries. (2014). Political polarization in the American public. Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

Pozen, D. E., Talley, E. L., & Nyarko, J. (2019). A computational analysis of constitutional polarization. Cornell Law Review, 105, 85.

Prabhu, M. T. (2021). Georgia anti-abortion law heads back to court in September. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Procellochs, N., & Feuerriegel. (2021). “SentimentAnalysis version 1.3-4” CRAN archive information. Retrieved October 21, 2021, from https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/SentimentAnalysis/SentimentAnalysis.pdf

Stavropoulos, N. (2021). Legal interpretivism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2021/entries/law-interpretivist/

Tannen, D. (1993). Framing in Discourse. Oxford University Press.

Valdez, D., & Goodson, P. (2020). Language bias in health research: External factors that influence latent language patterns. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 5, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2020.00004CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Valdez, D., Picket, A. C., Young, B.-R., & Golden, S. (2021). On mining words: The utility of topic models in health education research and practice. Health Promotion Practice, 22(3), 309–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839921999050CrossRefPubMed

Valdez, D., Ten Thij, M., Bathina, K., Rutter, L. A., & Bollen, J. (2020). Social media insights Into US mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal analysis of Twitter data. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(12), e21418. https://doi.org/10.2196/21418CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Neutral or Framed? A Sentiment Analysis of 2019 Abortion Laws
verfasst von: Danny Valdez
Patricia Goodson
Publikationsdatum: 18.01.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Sexuality Research and Social Policy / Ausgabe 3/2022
Print ISSN: 1868-9884
Elektronische ISSN: 1553-6610
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-022-00690-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Policy Implications

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2022

Vulnerability Analysis in Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) — Indications of Intersecting Vulnerable Positions in a National Survey Among Young People in Sweden

Queer Couples Trying to Conceive: Sexual Minority Women Couples’ Experiences with Assisted Reproduction

Indiscrete: How Typical College Student Sexual Behavior Troubles Affirmative Consent’s Demand for Clear Communication

Coming Out, Distress and Identity Threat in Gay Men in the UK

Perceptions of Sexual Healthcare Provision in Tanzania: a Key Informant Qualitative Study

Spanish Women and Pornography Based on Different Sexual Orientation: an Analysis of Consumption, Arousal, and Discomfort by Sexual Orientation and Age