Hcss report

scholarly articles
contained in EBSCO,
37
the world’s largest 
electronic collection, and published in 2013, in search for any pieces of evidence 
that were adduced by scholars to prove (or disprove) allegations of assertiveness, 
be they rhetorical or factual. Academic English-language articles were selected 
with similar search queries for both China and Russia and were then examined 
manually by HCSS analysts.

---

16
STRATEGIC MONITOR 2014
For the 
factual evidence
, HCSS also used a different mix of three approaches:
• We used the
 GDELT-events
(see above) involving China and Russia and having 
been coded in GDELT as ‘material’.
• Like we did for the analysis of rhetorical assertiveness, we also scanned the 
relevant 
scholarly articles
of the past year in search for the concrete events that 
were used to illustrate assertions (or denials) of assertiveness; and finally
• We also collected some 
numerical data
that could be used as proxies to reflect 
the two countries’ assertiveness in the diplomatic, informational, military and 
economic domains.
Since much use was made of (manual and automated) coding, we developed a 
consistent coding scheme based on three elements:
• whether an event was positive/neutral or negative (its tone);
• whether it was rhetorical or factual (its level); and
• whether it was of a diplomatic, economic or military nature (its type or category).
POSITIVE / NEUTRAL
NEGATIVE
Levels of 
Assertiveness
Type of assertiveness
Grand 
Category
Levels of 
Assertiveness
Type of assertiveness
Grand 
Category
1
Rhetorical
Positive/ 
Neutral
Diplomatic
-1
Rhetorical
Negative
Diplomatic
2
Economic
-2
Economic
3
Military
-3
Military
4
Factual
Positive/ 
Neutral
Diplomatic
-4
Factual
Negative
Diplomatic
5
Economic
-5
Economic
6
Military
-6
Military
FIGURE 2.9: ASSERTIVENESS CODING SCHEME

---