Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-489z4 Total loading time: 0.781 Render date: 2022-05-26T21:56:11.727Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }
  • English
Network Science Network Science

Article contents

Network patterns of legislative collaboration in twenty parliaments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2016

FRANÇOIS BRIATTE
FRANÇOIS BRIATTE*
Affiliation:
European School of Political Sciences, Lille, F-59000, France (e-mail: francois.briatte@sciencespo.fr)
Get access Rights & Permissions[Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
End Note
Information
Network Science , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , June 2016 , pp. 266 - 271
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alemán, E. (2015). Coauthorship ties in the Colombian congress, 2002–2006. Colombia Internacional, (83), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alemán, E., & Calvo, E. (2013). Explaining policy ties in presidential congresses: A network analysis of bill initiation data. Political Studies, 61 (2), 356–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratton, K. A., & Rouse, S. M. (2011). Networks in the legislative arena: How group dynamics affect cosponsorship. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 36 (3), 423–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiru, M. & Neamţu, S. (2012 Jun). Parliamentary representation under changing electoral rules: Cosponsorship in the Romanian parliament. Inaugural General Conference of the ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments: ‘Parliaments in Changing Times’.Google Scholar
Clark, J. H., & Caro, V. (2013). Multimember districts and the substantive representation of women: An analysis of legislative cosponsorship networks. Politics & Gender, 9 (1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulmont, B. (2011 Sep). Travail de députés. Blog post at http://coulmont.com/blog/2011/09/02/travail-de-deputes/.Google Scholar
Cranmer, S. J., & Desmarais, B. A. (2011). Inferential network analysis with exponential random graph models. Political Analysis, 19 (1), 66–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Döring, H., & Manow, P. 2014 (12). Parliaments and governments database (ParlGov): Information on parties, elections and cabinets in modern democracies. Stable version 14-12.Google Scholar
Fowler, J. H. (2006a). Connecting the Congress: A study of cosponsorship networks. Political Analysis, 14 (4), 456–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, J. H. (2006b). Legislative cosponsorship networks in the U.S. House and Senate. Social Networks, 28 (4), 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruchterman, T. M. J., & Reingold, E. M. (1991). Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Software: Practice and Experience, 21 (11), 1129–1164.Google Scholar
Gregor, K. (2013 Aug). Visualizing politics: Network analysis of bill sponsors. Blog post at http://blog.openingparliament.org/post/59496651147/visualizing-politics-network-analysis-of-bill.Google Scholar
Gross, J. H., Kirkland, J. H., & Shalizi, C. 2012 (5). Cosponsorship in the U.S. Senate: A multilevel two-mode approach to detecting subtle social predictors of legislative support. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Kirkland, J. H. (2013). Hypothesis testing for group structure in legislative networks. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 13 (2), 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkland, J. H. (2014). Chamber size effects on the collaborative structure of legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 39 (2), 169–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J.-Y., Jo, H.-J., & Yoon, J. W. (2014). Network analysis of Korean legislators using bipartite network projection. Journal of Internet Computing and Services, 15 (4), 103–110.Google Scholar
Leicht, E. A., & Newman, M. E. J. (2008). Community structure in directed networks. Physical Review Letters, 100 (11), 118703.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Micozzi, J. P. (2014). Alliance for progress? multilevel ambition and patterns of cosponsorship in the Argentine House. Comparative Political Studies, 47 (8), 1186–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, J., & Mucha, P. J. (2013). Portrait of political party polarization. Network Science, 1 (1), 119–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munzert, S., Rubba, C., Meißner, P., & Nyhuis, D. (2015). Automated data collection with R: A practical guide to web scraping and text mining. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Newman, M. E. J., & Girvan, M. (2004). Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E, 69 (2), 026113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google ScholarPubMed
Sartori, G. (1976/2005). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
Snijders, T. A. B. (2011). Statistical models for social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waugh, A. S., Pei, L., Fowler, J. H., Mucha, P. J., & Porter, M. A. (2009 Jul). Party polarization in Congress: A network science approach. Working paper at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1437055.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y., Friend, A. J., Traud, A. L., Porter, M. A., Fowler, J. H., & Mucha, P. J. (2008). Community structure in Congressional cosponsorship networks. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 387 (7), 1705–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Briatte supplementary material

Briatte supplementary material 1

Download Briatte supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1 MB
14
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Network patterns of legislative collaboration in twenty parliaments
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Network patterns of legislative collaboration in twenty parliaments
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Network patterns of legislative collaboration in twenty parliaments
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *