Poverty in Writing & Images

Project Summary

Ashley Murray (Chemistry/Math), Brian Glucksman (Global Cultural Studies), and Michelle Gao (Statistics/Economics) spent 10 weeks analyzing how meaning and use of the work “poverty” changed in presidential documents from the 1930s to the present. The students found that American presidential rhetoric about poverty has shifted in measurable ways over time. Presidential rhetoric, however, doesn’t necessarily affect policy change. As Michelle Gao explained, “The statistical methods we used provided another more quantitative way of analyzing the text. The database had around 130,000 documents, which is pretty impossible to read one by one and get all the poverty related documents by brute force. As a result, web-scraping and word filtering provided a more efficient and systematic way of extracting all the valuable information while minimizing human errors.” Through techniques such as linear regression, machine learning, and image analysis, the team effectively analyzed large swaths of textual and visual data. This approach allowed them to zero in on significant documents for closer and more in-depth analysis, paying particular attention to documents by presidents such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt or Lyndon B. Johnson, both leaders in what LBJ famously called “The War on Poverty.”

Click Here for the Executive Summary

Themes and Categories
Year
2018
Contact
Paul Bendich
Mathematics
bendich@math.duke.edu

Disciplines Involved: English, Literature, History, Public Policy, Political Science, all Quantitative STEM

Project Lead: Astrid Giugni

Project Manager: Nora Nunn

The documents for analysis were provided by the American Presidency Project: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/index.php.

In addition, this project aimed at further exploring how to better develop the link between data analysis and humanistic studies. Unlike many traditional STEM projects, the open-ended nature of this humanities project freed the students to take intellectual risks and venture into uncharted territory. Brian Glucksman found this to be an important part of the experience: “The main benefit that I felt about the open-endedness of the project was that it felt like it was impossible to fail. We had the opportunity to define the exact scope of our project, so we could never fall short of anything. It was even a little bit liberating to realize we could not do all the work that could be done from the American Presidency Project.”  

Mentored by Nora Nunn, a graduate student in the English Department with no previous computational experience, the group paid close attention to narrative and storytelling over the summer. Nora’s own research is deeply grounded in political and ethical considerations, focusing on genocide in 20th-century transnational American literature and visual cultures. This project prompted her to take a fresh look at her own work: “My experience with Data+ showed me that the humanities and data science can at times form a symbiotic relationship. In fact, in light of this realization, I now view my own research—about the life of another word with political implications (genocide)—through a different lens. How do images and language connect or disconnect? And what are the political and social implications of these findings? In the case of Poverty in Writing and Images, social issues were inextricably intertwined with statistical ones. The symbiosis of algorithms and policy, social justice and big data, humanism and STEM left me with more questions than answers. For that experience, I am grateful.” Nora’s mentorship guided the students to make some of the same connections, prompting Ashley Murray to argue that the “usefulness of an algorithm is measured by how it can actually help/aid the humans utilizing it. This project’s aim was to look at social issues, which is inherently a way of helping other humans, and we are just using algorithms to do so.”

Related People

Related Projects

This two-week teaching module in an introductory-level undergraduate course invites students to explore the power of Twitter in shaping public discourse. The project supplements the close-reading methods that are central to the humanities with large-scale social media analysis. This exercise challenges students to consider how applying visualization techniques to a dataset too vast for manual apprehension might enable them to identify for granular inspection smaller subsets of data and individual tweets—as well as to determine what factors do not lend themselves to close-reading at all. Employing an original dataset of almost one million tweets focused on the contested 2018 Florida midterm elections, students develop skills in using visualization software, generating research questions, and creating novel visualizations to answer those questions. They then evaluate and compare the affordances of large-scale data analytics with investigation of individual tweets, and draw on their findings to debate the role of social media in shaping public conversations surrounding major national events. This project was developed as a collaboration among the English Department (Emma Davenport and Astrid Giugni), Math Department (Hubert Bray), Duke University Library (Eric Monson), and Trinity Technology Services (Brian Norberg).

Understanding how to generate, analyze, and work with datasets in the humanities is often a difficult task without learning how to code or program. In humanities centered courses, we often privilege close reading or qualitative analysis over other methods of knowing, but by learning some new quantitative techniques we better prepare the students to tackle new forms of reading. This class will work with the data from the HathiTrust to develop ideas for thinking about how large groups and different discourse communities thought of queens of antiquity like Cleopatra and Dido.

Please refer to https://sites.duke.edu/queensofantiquity/ for more information.

Social and environmental contexts are increasingly recognized as factors that impact health outcomes of patients. This team will have the opportunity to collaborate directly with clinicians and medical data in a real-world setting. They will examine the association between social determinants with risk prediction for hospital admissions, and to assess whether social determinants bias that risk in a systematic way. Applied methods will include machine learning, risk prediction, and assessment of bias. This Data+ project is sponsored by the Forge, Duke's center for actionable data science.

Project Leads: Shelly Rusincovitch, Ricardo Henao, Azalea Kim

Project Manager: Austin Talbot