Research Papers

A multi-viewpoint spectrum paradigm for inter-actor relationship analysis in non-social textual corpora: The case of the UN General Debate Corpus

Expand
  • 1Department of Information Science, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 5290002, Israel;
    2Department of Political Studies, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 5290002, Israel
†Efrat Miller (Email: efrat.miller-rotem@biu.ac.il; ORCID:0009-0005-0310-1565).

Received date: 2024-12-29

  Revised date: 2025-04-02

  Accepted date: 2025-04-07

  Online published: 2025-06-06

Abstract

Purpose: This paper presents a new semi-automatic methodology for identifying inter-actor relationships by discerning viewpoints in non-social, political textual corpora. Although previous research has successfully discerned viewpoints, biases, and affiliations based on textual features, the task of relationship analysis in the absence of interactional data remains unaddressed.
Design/methodology/approach: We introduce a new paradigm for topic representation as a dynamic, continuous, multi-viewpoint spectrum based on the representation of viewpoints as vectors that capture common topical themes. As a proof of concept, we applied this paradigm to scrutinize the inter-state relationships reflected in the speeches of the UN General Assembly Debate Corpus (UNGDC).
Findings: The proposed paradigm effectively identifies discursive trends in UNGDC. Our analysis reveals common attitudes towards the topic and their prominence among different groups of actors and facilitates the analysis of relationships between actors through a quantitative representation of viewpoint similarity. The method also successfully captured temporal shifts in viewpoints and overall discourse trends, correlating with major geopolitical events.
Research limitations: One limitation of this study is the method’s sensitivity to data sparsity, which can skew viewpoint representations in cases of low topic involvement.
Practical implications: The proposed paradigm can be utilized by scholars in political science and other domains as a tool for semi-automated unsupervised textual analysis of various non-social textual sources, enabling the discovery of latent relationships between actors and the modeling of viewpoints in complex topics.
Originality/value: This study presents a novel framework for unsupervised semi-automatic textual analysis of relationships in non-social corpora through a new approach for the representation of viewpoints as thematic vectors.

Cite this article

Efrat Miller, Maayan Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Mor Mitrani . A multi-viewpoint spectrum paradigm for inter-actor relationship analysis in non-social textual corpora: The case of the UN General Debate Corpus[J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 0 : 0 . DOI: 10.2478/jdis-2025-0026

References

[1] Adamic, L. A., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Link Discovery (LinkKDD '05)(pp. 36-43). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134271.1134277
[2] Arias, S. B. (2022). Who securitizes? Climate change discourse in the United Nations. International Studies Quarterly, 66(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqac020
[3] Baclawski K., Bennett M., Berg-Cross G., Casanave C., Fritzsche D., Luciano J., Schneider T., Sharma R., Singer J., Sowa J., Sriram R. D., Westerinen A., & Whitten D. (2018). Ontology summit 2018 communiqué: Contexts in context. Applied Ontology, 13(3), 181-200. https://doi.org/10.3233/AO-180200
[4] Bailey M. A., Strezhnev A., & Voeten E. (2017). Estimating dynamic state preferences from United Nations voting data. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(2), 430-456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715595700
[5] Barbieri K., Keshk O. M. G., & Pollins B. M. (2009). Trading data: Evaluating our assumptions and coding rules. Conflict Management and Peace Science., 26(5), 471-491. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894209343887
[6] Baturo A., Dasandi N., & Mikhaylov S. J. (2017). Understanding state preferences with text as data: Introducing the UN general debate corpus. Research and Politics, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168017712821
[7] Blei D. M., Ng A. Y., & Jordan M. I. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation.Journal of machine Learning research, 3, 993-1022.
[8] Chelotti N., Dasandi N., & Jankin Mikhaylov S. (2022). Do intergovernmental organizations have a socialization effect on member state preferences? Evidence from the UN General Debate. International Studies Quarterly, 66(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqab069
[9] Claude, I. L. (1966). Collective legitimization as a political function of the United Nations. International Organization, 20(3), 367-379. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300012832
[10] Dasandi N., Jankin S., & Baturo A. (2023). Words to unite nations: The complete UN General Debate Corpus, 1946-present [Project]. OSF. https://osf.io/z69fj
[11] Dieng, A. B., Ruiz, F. J.R., & Blei, D. M.(2019). The dynamic embedded topic model. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.05545
[12] Doan T. M.,& Gulla, J. A.(2022). A Survey on Political Viewpoints Identification. Online Social Networks and Media, 30, 100208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.osnem.2022.100208
[13] Dong X.,& Lian, Y.(2021). A review of social media-based public opinion analyses: Challenges and recommendations. Technology in Society, 67, 101724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101724
[14] Gangula R. R. R., Duggenpudi S. R., & Mamidi R. (2019). Detecting political bias in news articles using headline attention. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (pp. 77-84). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w19-4809
[15] Garimella K., De Francisci Morales G., Gionis A., & Mathioudakis M. (2016). Quantifying controversy in social media. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining(pp. 33-42). https://doi.org/10.1145/2835776.2835792
[16] Gentzkiow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2010). What drives media slant? Evidence from U.S. Daily Newspapers. Econometrica, 78(1), 35-71. https://doi.org/10.3982/ecta7195
[17] Gibler D. M.(2008). International military alliances, 1648-2008. CQ Press.
[18] Gu Y., Chen T., Sun Y., & Wang B. (2017). Ideology detection for Twitter users via link analysis. In D. Lee, Y. R. Lin, N. Osgood, & R. Thomson (Eds.), Social, cultural, and behavioral modeling: SBP-BRiMS 2017 (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10354, pp. 262-268). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60240-0_32
[19] Gurciullo, S., & Mikhaylov, S. J. (2017a). Topology analysis of international networks based on debates in the United Nations. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1707.09491
[20] Gurciullo S.,& Mikhaylov, S. J.(2017b). Detecting policy preferences and dynamics in the UN general debate with neural word embeddings. In 2017 International Conference on the Frontiers and Advances in Data Science (FADS) 2017.8253197
[21] Hecht, C. (2016). The shifting salience of democratic governance: Evidence from the United Nations General Assembly General Debates. Review of International Studies, 42(5), 915-938. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210516000073
[22] Høyland B., Godbout J. F., Lapponi E., & Velldal E. (2014). Predicting Party Affiliations from European Parliament Debates. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp.56-60). https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/w14-2516
[23] Iyyer M., Enns P., Boyd-Graber J., & Resnik P. (2014). Political ideology detection using recursive neural networks. In Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics(volume 1, pp. 1113-1122). https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/p14-1105
[24] Kentikelenis, A., & Voeten, E. (2021). Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970-2018. Review of International Organizations, 16(4), 721-754. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11558-020-09404-Y
[25] Kitchens B., Johnson S. L., & Gray P. (2020). Understanding echo chambers and filter bubbles: The impact of social media on diversification and partisan shifts in news consumption. MIS Quarterly, 44(4). https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2020/16371
[26] Kozareva, Z., & Hovy, E. (2010). Learning arguments and supertypes of semantic relations using recursive patterns. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, (pp.1482-1491).
[27] Lauderdale, B. E., & Clark, T. S. (2012). The Supreme Court’s many median justices. American Political Science Review, 106(4), 847-866. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000469
[28] Lin W. H., Wilson T., Wiebe J., & Hauptmann A. (2006). Which side are you on? Identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels. InCoNLL 2006 - Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning(pp.109-116).
[29] Lotan, N., & Minkov, E. (2023). Social world knowledge: Modeling and applications. PLoS ONE, 18(7), e0283700. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283700
[30] Mitrani, M. (2017). The Discursive construction of the international community: Evidence from the United Nations General Assembly. KFG Working Paper Series, 78, 1-30. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-51596-1
[31] Mitrani, M. (2023). In search of the bellwether: A text as data approach for assessing trend-making in international discourse [conference paper].EISA Annual Conference, Potsdam, Germany.
[32] Paul M. J., Zhai C. X., & Girju R. (2010). Summarizing contrastive viewpoints in opinionated text. InProceedings of the 2010 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing(pp. 66-76).
[33] Prati, R. C., & Said-Hung, E. (2019). Predicting the ideological orientation during the Spanish 24M elections in Twitter using machine learning. AI and Society, 34(3), 589-598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-017-0761-0
[34] Preotiuc-Pietro D., Hopkins D. J., Liu Y., & Ungar L. (2017). Beyond binary labels: Political ideology prediction of Twitter users. In ACL 2017 - 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference (Long Papers, 1, pp.729-740). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P17-1068
[35] Quraishi M., Fafalios P., & Herder E. (2018). Viewpoint discovery and understanding in social networks. In WebSci 2018 - Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Web Science(pp.47-56). https://doi.org/10.1145/3201064.3201076
[36] Rao, A., & Spasojevic, N. (2016). Actionable and political text classification using word embeddings and LSTM. arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.02501
[37] Ren Z., Inel O., Aroyo L., & De Rijke M. (2016). Time-aware multi-viewpoint summarization of multilingual social text streams. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management(pp. 387-396). https://doi.org/10.1145/2983323.2983710
[38] Rheault L.,& Cochrane, C.(2020). Word embeddings for the analysis of ideological placement in parliamentary corpora. Political Analysis, 28(1), 112-133. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2019.26
[39] Sataloff R. T., Johns M. M., Kost K. M., Schoenfeld M., Eckhard S., Patz R., & van Meegdenburg H. (2018). Discursive landscapes and unsupervised topic modeling in IR: A validation of text-as-data approaches through a new corpus of UN Security Council speeches on Afghanistan. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1810.05572
[40] Shukla, D., & Unger, S. (2022). Sentiment analysis of international relations with Artificial Intelligence. Athens Journal of Sciences, 9(2), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajs.9-2-1
[41] Sim Y., Acree B. D. L., Gross J. H., & Smith N. A. (2013). Measuring ideological proportions in political speeches. InProceedings of the 2013 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing(pp. 91-101).
[42] Simmons, B. A., & Shaffer, R. (2019). Globalization and border securitization in international discourse. SSRN Electronic Journal, 3480613. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3480613
[43] Singer D., Bremer S., & Stuckey J. (1972). Capability Distribution,Uncertainty, and Major Power War, 1820-1965. In B. M. Russett (Ed.), Peace, War, and Numbers(pp.19-48). SAGE Publications Ltd.
[44] Thonet T., Cabanac G., Boughanem M., & Pinel-Sauvagnat K. (2016). VODUM: A topic model unifying viewpoint, topic and opinion discovery. In Proceedings of Advances in Information Retrieval: 38th European Conference on IR Research(pp. 533-545). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30671-1_39
[45] Trabelsi, A., & Zaïane, O. R. (2019). Phaitv: A phrase author interaction topic viewpoint model for the summarization of reasons expressed by polarized stances. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (Vol. 13, pp. 482-492). https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/3246
[46] Vilares, D., & He, Y. (2017). Detecting perspectives in political debates. In EMNLP 2017-Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing(pp. 1573-1582). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/d17-1165
[47] Vliegenthart R., Walgrave S., & Zicha B. (2013). How preferences, information and institutions interactively drive agenda-setting: Questions in the Belgian parliament, 1993-2000. European Journal of Political Research, 52(3), 390-418. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1475-6765.2012.02070.X
[48] Watanabe, K., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Theory-driven analysis of large corpora: Semisupervised topic classification of the UN speeches. Social Science Computer Review, 40(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320907027
[49] Wong F. M.F., Tan, C. W., Sen, S., & Chiang, M.(2016). Quantifying political leaning from tweets, retweets, and retweeters. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 28(8), 2158-2172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2016.2553667
[50] Xiao Z., Song W., Xu H., Ren Z., & Sun Y. (2020). TIMME: Twitter Ideology-detection via Multi-task Multi-relational embedding. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining(Vol.20, pp. 2258-2268). https://doi.org/10.1145/3394486.3403275
[51] Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M. (2019). Towards a diversified knowledge organization system: An open network of inter-linked subsystems with multiple validity scopes. Journal of Documentation, 75(5), 1124-1138. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2018-0163
[52] Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M. (2022). Turning filter bubbles into bubblesphere with multi-viewpoint KOS and diverse similarity. In Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 533-538. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.665
[53] Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Avidan, G. (2021). A new framework for systematic analysis and classification of inconsistencies in multi-viewpoint ontologies. Knowledge Organization, 48(5), 331-344. https://doi.org/10.5771/0943-7444-2021-5-331
[54] Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Hajibayova, L. (2020). A new framework for ethical creation and evaluation of multi-perspective knowledge organization systems. Journal of Documentation, 76(6), 1459-1471. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-04-2020-0053/FULL/XML
[55] Zhou D. X., Resnick P., & Mei Q. (2011). Classifying the political leaning of news articles and users from user votes. In Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 417-424). https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14108
[56] Zhou, Y., & Kurusu, K. (2021). How major powers diverge on global governance? Evidence from the United Nations General Debate. Kobe University Law Review, 54, 63-80. https://doi.org/10.24546/81013152
Outlines

/

京ICP备05002861号-43

Copyright © 2023 All rights reserved Journal of Data and Information Science

E-mail: jdis@mail.las.ac.cn Add:No.33, Beisihuan Xilu, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China

Support by Beijing Magtech Co.ltd E-mail: support@magtech.com.cn