Studying Advocacy Coalitions: Conceptual Choices and Methodological Approaches

ABSTRACT Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) research has been continuously evolving to improve the understanding of coalition studies. This study aims to critically examine the most common methods for coalition identification in ACF research and to identify strategies to strengthen their clarity and interpretation. We identify and develop ideas around four key steps in using social network analysis (SNA) to study coalitions: collecting and understanding data, choosing a community detection algorithm, applying data transformations, and, most importantly, interpreting community structures. We argue that neither this paper nor any others can provide a definitive approach for understanding advocacy coalitions. Instead, our charge to those using the ACF is threefold. First, recognize the elusiveness of advocacy coalitions and the inherent limitations of any representation. Second, acknowledge that network analysis of advocacy coalitions involves numerous combinatorial choices determined by data characteristics, algorithm selection, and data transformation choices. Third, encourage researchers to understand their data, select among these combinations, interpret results, and effectively communicate the sensitivity and robustness of their analyses.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Policy Studies Journal
Published
2026-05-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.70130
Primary Topic
Community Health and Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Studying Advocacy Coalitions: Conceptual Choices and Methodological Approaches

Allegra H. Fullerton, Christopher M. Weible, José Sánchez, Alejandra Medina
Policy Studies Journal
Community Health and Development
article

Studying Advocacy Coalitions: Conceptual Choices and Methodological Approaches

Allegra H. Fullerton, Christopher M. Weible, José Sánchez, Alejandra Medina
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) research has been continuously evolving to improve the understanding of coalition studies. This study aims to critically examine the most common methods for coalition identification in ACF research and to identify strategies to strengthen their clarity and interpretation. We identify and develop ideas around four key steps in using social network analysis (SNA) to study coalitions: collecting and understanding data, choosing a community detection algorithm, applying data transformations, and, most importantly, interpreting community structures. We argue that neither this paper nor any others can provide a definitive approach for understanding advocacy coalitions. Instead, our charge to those using the ACF is threefold. First, recognize the elusiveness of advocacy coalitions and the inherent limitations of any representation. Second, acknowledge that network analysis of advocacy coalitions involves numerous combinatorial choices determined by data characteristics, algorithm selection, and data transformation choices. Third, encourage researchers to understand their data, select among these combinations, interpret results, and effectively communicate the sensitivity and robustness of their analyses.

Policy Studies Journal
University of Colorado Denver (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Community Health and Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.