Double-Edged Sword of Mediated Visibility: How Visual Framing Undermines Congresswomen's Perceived Competence

Truth and evidence-based communication provide important foundations for democratic governance, accountability, and collective decision-making. Prior work shows that evidence-oriented language in US congressional floor speeches has declined since the mid-1970s, alongside broader changes in legislative productivity and polarization. This study shifts the analysis from congressional sessions to individual members of Congress to examine whether epistemic orientation varies systematically across legislators and whether it relates to political behavior and legislative effectiveness. Using the Evidence-Minus-Intuition (EMI) score, we measure the relative prevalence of evidence-oriented versus intuition-oriented language in congressional floor speeches and Twitter posts. We link these measures to legislator-level data on ideology, institutional position, communication context, and Legislative Effectiveness Score (LES). The results show that more ideologically extreme members use less evidence-oriented language on the congressional floor. EMI also exhibits cross-platform consistency with members who use more evidence-oriented language in floor speeches also being more evidence-oriented on Twitter, although EMI is lower on Twitter overall. Finally, EMI in congressional speeches is positively associated with individual legislative effectiveness, even after accounting for ideology and extensive political, institutional, demographic, topical, and communication volume controls. These findings suggest that evidence-oriented language is not only an aggregate feature of congressional discourse but also a meaningful attribute of individual-level legislative communication and effectiveness.

Election integrity is a shared commitment in American politics, but Democrats and Republicans in Congress increasingly mean different things by it. Analyzing 10,420 congressional e-newsletters sent from 2010 to 2025, we examine how the two parties invoke election terms such as integrity,'' security,'' and fraud.'' Using diachronic word embeddings, which track semantic change through how words are used in context, we measure how differently each party uses each term, how much each party shifts, and whether they share nearest semantic neighbors. We show that members of Congress do not need different words to tell different stories about elections. They need only place those same words in different company. Across nearly every term and year, the two parties surround election-integrity vocabulary with entirely different words. That divergence is easy to miss, because most election vocabulary is no more divergent than other words used at roughly the same frequency, and neither party's usage shifted more than the other's. Only a subset of terms grew more divergent, most notably certification,'' while rigged'' and stolen'' entered election discourse after 2020 and polarized there. By 2024, Democrats surround voter,'' election,'' and integrity'' with the language of access and administration. Republicans surround the same terms with citizenship verification,'' noncitizen voting,'' and border security.'' For one party, integrity means protecting eligible voters' ability to cast a ballot. For the other, it means protecting the electoral process from illegitimate ballots. Election officials, who must administer a single system under both definitions, inherit this tension.

Visual content shapes audience perception and opinion on social media, and computational social science increasingly relies on automated tools to analyze images at scale. Yet a measurement gap persists: existing tools rely on predefined categories or produce only coarse image-level labels, while measuring which specific objects appear in an image, how prominently, and where in the frame remains difficult at scale. We introduce Perceive, Refine, Reason (PRR), a calibrated pipeline that turns flexible vision-language detectors into auditable measurement instruments for social-scientific research. PRR combines natural-language category prompts with pixel-level spatial refinement via the Segment Anything Model (SAM) and a multimodal LLM arbitration layer whose reasoning chains externalize domain knowledge and lower the expertise threshold for human-in-the-loop validation. A complementary three-tier auditability framework applies quantification learning to profile per-category reliability, support task-aligned configuration, and statistically correct prevalence estimates. Across four vision-language detectors and nine sociological categories, the pipeline yields substantial precision gains over zero-shot baselines, including a 43.3-point improvement for the strongest backbone. Applying PRR to 103,920 Facebook images from U.S. legislators during the 2024 election cycle and linking detections to DW-NOMINATE ideology scores, we find that more conservative legislators display U.S. flags as larger visual elements, with a weaker tendency toward peripheral placement, a spatial pattern invisible to binary detection. PRR provides computational social scientists with a model-agnostic toolkit for accessible, spatially-grounded, and correctable visual measurement.