Current Psychology

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 215–224 | Cite as

Mapping the political language of the 1998 good friday agreement

  • Alexandra M. Forsythe


The political statements of 12 prominent politicians involved in the 1998 Good Friday Agreement were examined using Diction (Hart, 1984a & 1995), a text analysis program that yields five measures of language variability: Optimism, Activity, Realism, Commonality, and Certainty. It was predicted that multi-dimensional scaling (MDS) would indicate that three of these variables could be used to group the politicians on the basis of their published policy positions. MDS indicated that the language of the politicians could be plotted on two dimensions. Activity, with an angle of 31.8°, and Optimism, with an angle of 35.9°, represent the first dimension. Realism loaded significantly on Dimension 2 which has an angle of 42.2°. Limitations of text analysis programs are considered together with suggestions for future developments.


Multidimensional Scaling Political Discourse Current Psychology Political Figure Lexical Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alexa, M. (1997). Computer assisted text analysis methodology in the Social Sciences. ZUMA Arbeitsbericht, 97/07. Mannheim: ZUMA.Google Scholar
  2. Allport, G.W., & Odbert, H.S. (1936). Trait names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, No. 211.Google Scholar
  3. Aughey, A., & Morrow, D. (1996). Northern Ireland politics. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Bew, P., Patterson, H., & Teague, P. (1997). Between war and peace: The political future of Northern Ireland. London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  5. Borg, L., & Groenen, P. (1997). Modern Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Buckley, A.D. (1998). Daring us to laugh: Creativity and power in Northern Irish symbols. In A.D. Buckley (Ed.), Symbols in Northern Ireland. Belfast: Queens University Belfast.Google Scholar
  7. DeVries, M. (1999). Computer based content analysis of party manifestos of the 1998 Dutch elections. Paper presented at the workshop on Estimating policy positions of political actors. Mannheim: ECPR Joint Sessions.Google Scholar
  8. Elliott, S., &Flackes, W.D. (1999). Northern Ireland a political directory, 1968–1999. Belfast: Blackstaff.Google Scholar
  9. Eysenck, H.J. (1954). The psychology of politics. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  10. Goldstein, J.S., Pevehouse, J.C., Gerner, D.J., and Telhami, S. (2001). Reciprocity, triangularity, and cooperation in the Middle East, 1979-97. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45, 594–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Graber, D.A. (1976). Perceptions of Middle East conflict in the UN, 1953–1965. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 13, 454–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hart, R. (1984a). Verbal style and the presidency: A computer-based analysis. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hart, R. (1984b). Systematic analysis of political discourse. In K.R. Sanders (Ed.), Political communication yearbook. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hart, R. (1997). Diction 4.0. The text-analysis program user’s manual. Texas: Scolari.Google Scholar
  15. Hart, R. (2001). Redeveloping DICTION: Theoretical considerations. In M. West (Ed.), Theory, Method, and Practice of Computer Content Analysis. New York: Ablex.Google Scholar
  16. Hart, R., & Jarvis, S. (1997). Political debate: Forms, styles and media. American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 1095–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hart, R., & Jennings, W. (2000). Assessing political vocabularies: a Diction-based analysis of the Aspen transcripts. Austin: Strauss Institute for Civic Participation.Google Scholar
  18. John, O.P, Angleitner, A., & Ostendorf, F. (1988). The lexical approach to personality: A historical review of trait taxonomic research. European Journal of Personality, 2, 171–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kruskal, J., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Laver, M., & Garry, J. (2000). Estimating policy positions from political texts. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pennebaker, J.W. & King, L.A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296–1312PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pennebaker, J.W., Matthias, R.M., & Niederhoffer, K.G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Salazar, C. (1998). Identities in Ireland. History, ethnicity, and the nation-state. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 1, 369–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schroder, H., Driver, M.J., & Streufert, S. (1967). Human information processing. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Stalans, L. (1997). Multidimensional scaling. In L. Grimm & P. Yamold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  26. Suedfeld, P., Corteen, R., & McCormick, C. (1986). The role of integrative complexity in military leadership: Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 76,498–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Suedfeld, P., & Rank, A. D. (1976). Revolutionary leaders: Long-term success as a function of changes in conceptual complexity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Suedfeld, P. & Tetlock, P.E., (1977). Integrative complexity of communications in international crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 27,169–186.Google Scholar
  29. Suedfeld, P., Tetlock, P.E., & Ramirez, C. (1977). War, peace and integrative complexity. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 27,427–442.Google Scholar
  30. Tetlock, P.E. (1981). Preto post election shifts in presidential rhetoric: Impression management or cognitive adjustment? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 207–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tetlock, P.E. (1983). Cognitive style and political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 118–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wallace, M.D., Suedfeld, P. & Thachuk, K. (1993). Political rhetoric of leaders under stress in the gulf crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 37, 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Whyte, J. (1990). Interpreting Northern Ireland. Oxford: Claredon.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandra M. Forsythe
    • 1
  1. 1.Queen’s University BelfastUSA

Personalised recommendations