1,721,014 research outputs found
Research on motions as dealt with in Dutch Parliament 2009-2011
No full textThis dataset contains the data used in the following articles:
- Popping, Roel (2013). "Coding issues in cognitive mapping of games." Open Journal of Political Science, 3 (1): 16-23, doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.31003
- Goeree, Mariska & Popping, Roel (2014). “Types of motions as proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives.” Quality and Quantity, 48 (6): 3253-3269, doi: 10.1007/s11135-013-9954-x.
- Popping, Roel & Wittek, Rafael (2015). “Success and failure of parliamentary motions - A social dilemma approach.” PLoS ONE, 10 (8): e0133510. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133510.
The articles use motions as have been proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives (De Tweede Kamer van de Staten Generaal). The first and last study use data based on a stratified random sample drawn from all motions that have been proposed between September 2009 and February 2010 or between September 2010 and February 2011. The second study uses only motions about two specific issues, so this is a restriction. However the motions have to cover two governments Balkenende IV (February 22, 2007 until October 14, 2010, which means including caretaker period) and Rutte I (October 14, 2010 until April 23, 2012, this excludes the caretaker period). For this reason the time period is slightly different
Research on motions as dealt with in Dutch Parliament 2009-2011
No full textThis dataset contains the data used in the following articles: - Popping, Roel (2013). "Coding issues in cognitive mapping of games." Open Journal of Political Science, 3 (1): 16-23, doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.31003 - Goeree, Mariska & Popping, Roel (2014). “Types of motions as proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives.” Quality and Quantity, 48 (6): 3253-3269, doi: 10.1007/s11135-013-9954-x. - Popping, Roel & Wittek, Rafael (2015). “Success and failure of parliamentary motions - A social dilemma approach.” PLoS ONE, 10 (8): e0133510. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133510. The articles use motions as have been proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives (De Tweede Kamer van de Staten Generaal). The first and last study use data based on a stratified random sample drawn from all motions that have been proposed between September 2009 and February 2010 or between September 2010 and February 2011. The second study uses only motions about two specific issues, so this is a restriction. However the motions have to cover two governments Balkenende IV (February 22, 2007 until October 14, 2010, which means including caretaker period) and Rutte I (October 14, 2010 until April 23, 2012, this excludes the caretaker period). For this reason the time period is slightly different
Research on motions as dealt with in Dutch Parliament 2009-2011
No full textThis dataset contains the data used in the following articles:- Popping, Roel (2013). "Coding issues in cognitive mapping of games." Open Journal of Political Science, 3 (1): 16-23, doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.31003- Goeree, Mariska & Popping, Roel (2014). “Types of motions as proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives.” Quality and Quantity, 48 (6): 3253-3269, doi: 10.1007/s11135-013-9954-x.- Popping, Roel & Wittek, Rafael (2015). “Success and failure of parliamentary motions - A social dilemma approach.” PLoS ONE, 10 (8): e0133510. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133510.The articles use motions as have been proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives (De Tweede Kamer van de Staten Generaal). The first and last study use data based on a stratified random sample drawn from all motions that have been proposed between September 2009 and February 2010 or between September 2010 and February 2011. The second study uses only motions about two specific issues, so this is a restriction. However the motions have to cover two governments Balkenende IV (February 22, 2007 until October 14, 2010, which means including caretaker period) and Rutte I (October 14, 2010 until April 23, 2012, this excludes the caretaker period). For this reason the time period is slightly different.</p
Research on motions as dealt with in Dutch Parliament 2009-2011
No full textThis dataset contains the data used in the following articles:
- Popping, Roel (2013). "Coding issues in cognitive mapping of games." Open Journal of Political Science, 3 (1): 16-23, doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.31003
- Goeree, Mariska & Popping, Roel (2014). “Types of motions as proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives.” Quality and Quantity, 48 (6): 3253-3269, doi: 10.1007/s11135-013-9954-x.
- Popping, Roel & Wittek, Rafael (2015). “Success and failure of parliamentary motions - A social dilemma approach.” PLoS ONE, 10 (8): e0133510. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133510.
The articles use motions as have been proposed in the Dutch House of Representatives (De Tweede Kamer van de Staten Generaal). The first and last study use data based on a stratified random sample drawn from all motions that have been proposed between September 2009 and February 2010 or between September 2010 and February 2011. The second study uses only motions about two specific issues, so this is a restriction. However the motions have to cover two governments Balkenende IV (February 22, 2007 until October 14, 2010, which means including caretaker period) and Rutte I (October 14, 2010 until April 23, 2012, this excludes the caretaker period). For this reason the time period is slightly different
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Why do some potential party members join the party and others don't?:a preliminary report
No full textWhy do some potential party members join the party and others don't?:a preliminary report
No full text- …
