Citation

McDonnell M, Owen JE, Bantum EO. JMIR Form. Res. 2020; 4(10).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, JMIR Publications)

DOI

10.2196/18246

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Given the high volume of text-based communication such as email, Facebook, Twitter, and additional web-based and mobile apps, there are unique opportunities to use text to better understand underlying psychological constructs such as emotion. Emotion recognition in text is critical to commercial enterprises (eg, understanding the valence of customer reviews) and to current and emerging clinical applications (eg, as markers of clinical progress and risk of suicide), and the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) is a commonly used program.

OBJECTIVE: Given the wide use of this program, the purpose of this study is to update previous validation results with two newer versions of LIWC.

METHODS: Tests of proportions were conducted using the total number of emotion words identified by human coders for each emotional category as the reference group. In addition to tests of proportions, we calculated F scores to evaluate the accuracy of LIWC 2001, LIWC 2007, and LIWC 2015.

RESULTS: Results indicate that LIWC 2001, LIWC 2007, and LIWC 2015 each demonstrate good sensitivity for identifying emotional expression, whereas LIWC 2007 and LIWC 2015 were significantly more sensitive than LIWC 2001 for identifying emotional expression and positive emotion; however, more recent versions of LIWC were also significantly more likely to overidentify emotional content than LIWC 2001. LIWC 2001 demonstrated significantly better precision (F score) for identifying overall emotion, negative emotion, and anxiety compared with LIWC 2007 and LIWC 2015.

CONCLUSIONS: Taken together, these results suggest that LIWC 2001 most accurately reflects the emotional identification of human coders. © 2020 JMIR Publications.

Language: en

Keywords

Emotion; Validation; Linguistic analysis