Scholarlink

Valence measurement may be used to gauge feedback, yet a thorough understanding remains an ongoing pursuit, particularly when viewed through the emotional lens of trust. This research advances this perspective by showcasing its efficacy in classifying arguments about gun legislation, specifically in its successful alignment with legislative outcomes. The study conducts a comparative analysis of floor speeches by Senate members concerning gun legislation in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook and the Uvalde school shootings from 2013, 2014, and 2022. The examination reveals that terms associated with valence may serve as collaboration indicators. Notably, the valence showed a significant difference between the two means. This exploratory study is limited by a small sample size in the Uvalde and Sandy Hook debates (n = 82 and n = 62, respectively). Also, unbalanced representation in the speeches may restrict the broad generalization of the analysis. However, it does suggest further study utilizing resources such as those in the C-SPAN Video Archives.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Trust as a Classification Tool: Analyzing Collaboration in Senate Floor Speeches on Gun Legislation Post-Uvalde and Sandy Hook

  • 会议论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • William Ledbetter

摘要

Valence measurement may be used to gauge feedback, yet a thorough understanding remains an ongoing pursuit, particularly when viewed through the emotional lens of trust. This research advances this perspective by showcasing its efficacy in classifying arguments about gun legislation, specifically in its successful alignment with legislative outcomes. The study conducts a comparative analysis of floor speeches by Senate members concerning gun legislation in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook and the Uvalde school shootings from 2013, 2014, and 2022. The examination reveals that terms associated with valence may serve as collaboration indicators. Notably, the valence showed a significant difference between the two means. This exploratory study is limited by a small sample size in the Uvalde and Sandy Hook debates (n = 82 and n = 62, respectively). Also, unbalanced representation in the speeches may restrict the broad generalization of the analysis. However, it does suggest further study utilizing resources such as those in the C-SPAN Video Archives.