You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 7 Next »

This corpus is distributed together with

Echoes of power: Language effects and power differences in social interaction   Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, Lillian Lee, Bo Pang, and Jon Kleinberg.  Proceedings of WWW, 2012.


This corpus builds upon and enriches the data initially used in:

COMPUTATIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE CONVERSATIONAL DYNAMICS OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. Timothy W. Hawes, M.A. Thesis, 2009

Elements of a computational model for multi-party discourse: The turn-taking behavior of Supreme Court justices.  Timothy Hawes, Jimmy Lin, and Philip Resnik, JASIST 60(8), 2009. [original data]


DATA (.zip)

README


Brief description:

This corpus contains a collection of conversations from the U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments (http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/) with metadata:

- 51,498 utterances making up 50,389 conversational exchanges
- from 204 cases involving 11 Justices and 311 other participants (lawyers or amici curiae)
- metadata includes:  - case outcome - vote of the Justice  - section in which the conversation took place - gender annotation
Case outcome and vote data were extracted from the the Spaeth Supreme Court database (http://scdb.wustl.edu/)

Brief description:
This corpus contains a collection of conversations from the U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments (http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/) with metadata:

- 51,498 utterances making up 50,389 conversational exchanges

- from 204 cases involving 11 Justices and 311 other participants (lawyers or amici curiae)

- metadata includes: 

- case outcome

- vote of the Justice 

- section in which the conversation took place

- gender annotation

Case outcome and vote data were extracted from the the Spaeth Supreme Court database (http://scdb.wustl.edu/)

This material is based upon work supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant IIS-0910664.  Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed above are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

  • No labels