Systematic Review of Empirical Applications of Representative Claim Analysis

The study of representative claims has been increasingly gaining ground in the field of representation. According to Saward, the representative process of claim-making contains a claim-maker, who constructs a represented group, and an audience to which the claims are offered. Yet, the Representative Claims Analysis faces methodological challenges through the context dependency of claim-making, non-verbal elements, or the rejection/acceptance of representative claims by the relevant constituency. A first assessment of exemplary studies reveals varying strategies to overcome possible methodological pitfalls and differences in the definitions and theoretical foundation of the analysed representative claims. Even though the reference to the work of Saward is common, the analysis focusses on either the process of claim making, the justifications of claims, the rejection by constituencies and/or on selected examples. This paper aims to structure the methodologies used in the existing literature so far, to make the differences in their theoretical foundations visible, and compare their findings in the light of these different research frames. Therefore, this paper answers the following research questions: Q1: What are the differences in the empirical studies of representative claims concerning methodology, case selection, and theoretical foundation (e.g. emphasising justifications over audiences)? Q2: How do research findings differ relevant to the varieties of methodology? To answer these questions, two independent researchers conducted a systematic review by following a pre-published research protocol on all empirical studies in the JSTOR, ProQuest, and the Web of Science databases. The systematic search yielded 3,127 results. Both researchers reviewed these references in a two-step process by screening titles and abstracts for excluding false positives and finally including all relevant studies through full-text screening. I check the selected studies for selection bias, publication bias, and competing interest. The findings allow to interpret and assess differences of implications, in effectiveness, and shortcomings of applied research frames. Based on the review of all representative claims analyses referenced in the mentioned databases, I develop a methodological overview with bias assessment. Accounting for the findings from the review I derive an own exemplary, case sensitive research frame for the analysis of statements and speeches by European Commissioners.