Linguistic and semantic factors in government e-petitions: A comparison between the United Kingdom and the United States of America

Abstract Many legislators around the word are offering the use of web based e-petitioning platforms to allow their electorate to influence government policy and action. A popular e-petition can gain much coverage, both in traditional media and social media. The task then becomes how to understand what features may make an e-petition popular and hence, potentially influential. One area of investigation is the linguistic and topical content of the supporting e-petition text. This study takes an existing methodology previously applied to the American government's e-petition platform and replicates the study for the United Kingdom's equivalent platform. This allows an insight into not only the United Kingdom's e-petition process but also a comparison with a similar platform. We find that when assessing an e-petition's popularity, the control variables are significant in both countries, e-petitions in the United Kingdom are more popular if some named entities are used in the text, and that topics are commonly more influential in America.

[1]  Helen Briassoulis,et al.  Online petitions: new tools of secondary analysis? , 2010 .

[2]  Fabrício Benevenuto,et al.  Comparing and combining sentiment analysis methods , 2013, COSN '13.

[3]  Brian F. Schaffner,et al.  Postmaterialist Particularism: What Petitions Can Tell Us About Biases in the Policy Agenda , 2017 .

[4]  Amanda Potts,et al.  Does semantic tagging identify cultural change in British and American English , 2012 .

[5]  Catherine L. Dumas,et al.  Examining political mobilization of online communities through e-petitioning behavior in We the People , 2015, Big Data Soc..

[6]  Feng Chen,et al.  E-petitioning as Collective Political Action in We the People , 2015 .

[7]  Loni Hagen,et al.  Introducing textual analysis tools for policy informatics: a case study of e-petitions , 2015, DG.O.

[8]  Jill Sheppard.  Online petitions in Australia: Information, opportunity and gender , 2015 .

[9]  Mihai Surdeanu,et al.  The Stanford CoreNLP Natural Language Processing Toolkit , 2014, ACL.

[10]  Kurt Hornik,et al.  topicmodels : An R Package for Fitting Topic Models , 2016 .

[11]  Marcel Salathé,et al.  The dynamics of health behavior sentiments on a large online social network , 2012, EPJ Data Science.

[12]  Jiao Wu,et al.  A Multi-Appeal Model of Persuasion for Online Petition Success: A Linguistic Cue-Based Approach , 2019, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[13]  C. Bochel,et al.  ‘Reaching in’? The potential for e-petitions in local government in the United Kingdom , 2017 .

[14]  C. Bochel.  Petitions Systems: Contributing to Representative Democracy? , 2013 .

[15]  P. Fraser.  PUBLIC PETITIONING AND PARLIAMENT BEFORE 1832 , 1961 .

[16]  R. Taagepera.  The size of national assemblies , 1972 .

[17]  Katherine L. Milkman,et al.  What Makes Online Content Viral? , 2012 .

[18]  Vicenç Gómez,et al.  Online Petitioning Through Data Exploration and What We Found There: A Dataset of Petitions from Avaaz.org , 2018, ICWSM.

[19]  Scott A. Hale,et al.  Political Turbulence: How Social Media Shape Collective Action , 2015 .

[20]  The Two Streams: British and American English , 1986 .

[21]  Theresa A. Pardo,et al.  Policy Analytics: Definitions, Components, Methods, and Illustrative Examples , 2018 .

[22]  Gwilym Dodd.  Justice and Grace: Private Petitioning and the English Parliament in the Late Middle Ages , 2007 .

[23]  Jan-Hinrik Schmidt,et al.  Birds of a feather petition together? Characterizing e-petitioning through the lens of platform data , 2016 .

[24]  Scott Wright,et al.  ‘Success’ and online political participation: The case of Downing Street E-petitions , 2016 .

[25]  C. Bochel.  Process matters: petitions systems in Britain’s legislatures , 2016 .

[26]  Loni Hagen,et al.  E-petition popularity: Do linguistic and semantic factors matter? , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[27]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[28]  Scott A. Hale,et al.  Petition growth and success rates on the UK No. 10 Downing Street website , 2013, WebSci.

[29]  R. Hough.  Do Legislative Petitions Systems Enhance the Relationship between Parliament and Citizen? , 2012 .

[30]  Donghua Chen,et al.  The Interplay Between Digital and Political Divides , 2014 .

[31]  W. Robinson,et al.  Similarities and Differences in Perceptions and Evaluations of the Communication Styles of American and British Mangers , 2002 .

[32]  Jean-Gabriel Contamin,et al.  Les transformations des comportements politiques au prisme de l'e-pétitionnement : potentialités et limites d'un dispositif d'étude pluridisciplinaire , 2015 .

[33]  Stephen D. Clark,et al.  Classification of Westminster Parliamentary constituencies using e-petition data , 2017, EPJ Data Science.

[34]  Scott A. Hale,et al.  How digital design shapes political participation: A natural experiment with social information , 2018, PloS one.

[35]  J. Leblanc,et al.  Analyser des pétitions en ligne : potentialités et limites d'un dispositif d'étude pluridisciplinaire , 2016 .

[36]  S. Mills,et al.  Directness and Indirectness Across Cultures , 2014 .

[37]  Loni Hagen,et al.  Content analysis of e-petitions with topic modeling: How to train and evaluate LDA models? , 2018, Inf. Process. Manag..

[38]  Scott A. Hale,et al.  Rapid rise and decay in petition signing , 2013, EPJ Data Science.

[39]  Alexander Serebrenik,et al.  Choosing your weapons: On sentiment analysis tools for software engineering research , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME).

[40]  Sarah Egan.  National identity and cultural resonance in English foxhunting movements , 2014 .

[41]  Taha Yasseri,et al.  What, when and where of petitions submitted to the UK government during a time of chaos , 2019, Policy Sciences.

[42]  Stephen D. Clark,et al.  Estimating the outcome of UKs referendum on EU membership using e-petition data and machine learning algorithms , 2018, Journal of Information Technology & Politics.

[43]  Jong Hwan Suh,et al.  Applying text and data mining techniques to forecasting the trend of petitions filed to e-People , 2010, Expert Syst. Appl..

[44]  Loni Hagen,et al.  Data Analytics for Policy Informatics: The Case of E-Petitioning , 2018 .

[45]  S. S. Ravi,et al.  E-Petitioning and Online Media: The Case of #BringBackOurGirls , 2017, DG.O.

[46]  D. Elazar.  Contrasting Unitary and Federal Systems , 1997 .

[47]  T. Mullen.  The Scottish Independence Referendum 2014 , 2014 .

[48]  Christopher Potts,et al.  Recursive Deep Models for Semantic Compositionality Over a Sentiment Treebank , 2013, EMNLP.

[49]  Alexander Porshnev.  Success Factors of Electronic Petitions at Russian Public Initiative Project: The Role of Informativeness, Topic and Lexical Information , 2018, SocInfo.

[50]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Incorporating Non-local Information into Information Extraction Systems by Gibbs Sampling , 2005, ACL.

[51]  S. Asai.  Sales Patterns of Hit Music in Japan , 2009 .