arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

International organizations in national parliamentary debates

Tom F. Hunter & Stefanie Walter

Review of International Organizations2025https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-024-09577-warticle
ABDC C
Weight
0.46

What the paper says

Abstract This data article introduces IOParlspeech, an original dataset of over 600,000 statements on international organizations (IOs) in parliamentary debates in six countries between 1990 and 2018. We explain the creation of the dataset and demonstrate the value of IOParlspeech through two exploratory studies. First, we examine which actors convey more positive and more negative sentiment regarding IOs in parliamentary discourse. Contributing to research on IO contestation, we demonstrate that parliamentarians from the radical right and left, as well as parliamentarians in opposition, use more negative language in their IO-related communication. Second, we explore the salience of IOs in national parliaments. Speaking to debates about the democratic deficit of IOs, we show that IOs with higher authority and those with an international parliamentary institution are more likely to be discussed in parliament. We conclude by suggesting further uses for IOParlspeech.

4 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-024-09577-w

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{tom2025,
  title        = {{International organizations in national parliamentary debates}},
  author       = {Tom F. Hunter & Stefanie Walter},
  journal      = {Review of International Organizations},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-024-09577-w},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

International organizations in national parliamentary debates

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.46

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.37 × 0.4 = 0.15
M · momentum0.60 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.