ADVERTISEMENT

If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.

It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.

Wiley InterScience

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies

Volume 4 Issue 4, Pages 1007 - 1039

Published Online: 10 Dec 2007

© 2009 Cornell Law School and Wiley Subscription Services, Inc



< Previous Abstract  |  Next Abstract >

Save Article to My Profile      Download Citation      Request Permissions

Abstract |  References  |  Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 206K)  | Related Articles | Citation Tracking

Recounting the Courts? Applying Automated Content Analysis to Enhance Empirical Legal Research
Michael Evans 1*, Wayne McIntosh 1*, Jimmy Lin 2*, and Cynthia Cates 3*
  1 Department of Government & Politics, University of Maryland
  2 College of Information Studies, University of Maryland
  3 Department of Political Science, Towson University
Correspondence to   *Wayne McIntosh, Department of Government & Politics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742; e-mail: wmcintosh@gvtpt.umd.edu. Evans is in the Department of Government & Politics, University of Maryland; McIntosh is Associate Professor, Department of Government & Politics, University of Maryland; Lin is Assistant Professor, College of Information Studies, University of Maryland; Cates is Professor, Department of Political Science, Towson University.
Copyright ©2007, Copyright the Authors; Journal compilation ©2007, Cornell Law School and Blackwell Publishing, Inc.

ABSTRACT

Political scientists in general and public law specialists in particular have only recently begun to exploit text classification using machine learning techniques to enable the reliable and detailed content analysis of political/legal documents on a large scale. This article provides an overview and assessment of this methodology. We describe the basics of text classification, suggest applications of the technique to enhance empirical legal research (and political science more broadly), and report results of experiments designed to test the strengths and weaknesses of alternative approaches for classifying the positions and interpreting the content of advocacy briefs submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court. We find that the Wordscores method (introduced by Laver et al. 2003), and various models using a Naïve Bayes classifier, perform well at accurately classifying the ideological direction of amicus curiae briefs submitted in the Bakke (1978) and Bollinger (2003) affirmative action cases. We also find that automated feature selection techniques can enable the detection of disparate issue conceptualizations by opposing sides in a single case, and facilitate analysis of relative linguistic "reliance" and "dominance" over time. We conclude by discussing the implications of our results and pointing to areas where technical and infrastructure improvements are most needed.


DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DOI)
10.1111/j.1740-1461.2007.00113.x About DOI

Related Articles

  • Find other articles like this in Wiley InterScience
  • Find articles in Wiley InterScience written by any of the authors

Wiley InterScience is a member of CrossRef.

Cross Ref Member


Hot Topic
JELS

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies offers the most downloaded articles of 2008!

Click on the links below for FREE access:

IT'S TIME TO RENEW YOUR MEMBERSHIP


It’s time to renew your membership in the Society for Empirical Legal Studies.

Click here for 2010 membership rates and to renew securely online.

Law
Law