Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count

BackgroundGiven 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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: McDonnell, Michelle, Owen, Jason Edward, Bantum, Erin O'Carroll
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: JMIR Publications 2020-10-01
Series:JMIR Formative Research
Online Access:https://formative.jmir.org/2020/10/e18246
id doaj-9ab4b37dd6dd4b53b02a5994016090e3
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9ab4b37dd6dd4b53b02a5994016090e32021-04-02T18:55:55ZengJMIR PublicationsJMIR Formative Research2561-326X2020-10-01410e1824610.2196/18246Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word CountMcDonnell, MichelleOwen, Jason EdwardBantum, Erin O'Carroll BackgroundGiven 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. ObjectiveGiven the wide use of this program, the purpose of this study is to update previous validation results with two newer versions of LIWC. MethodsTests 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. ResultsResults 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. ConclusionsTaken together, these results suggest that LIWC 2001 most accurately reflects the emotional identification of human coders.https://formative.jmir.org/2020/10/e18246
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author McDonnell, Michelle
Owen, Jason Edward
Bantum, Erin O'Carroll
spellingShingle McDonnell, Michelle
Owen, Jason Edward
Bantum, Erin O'Carroll
Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
JMIR Formative Research
author_facet McDonnell, Michelle
Owen, Jason Edward
Bantum, Erin O'Carroll
author_sort McDonnell, Michelle
title Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
title_short Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
title_full Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
title_fullStr Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
title_full_unstemmed Identification of Emotional Expression With Cancer Survivors: Validation of Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count
title_sort identification of emotional expression with cancer survivors: validation of linguistic inquiry and word count
publisher JMIR Publications
series JMIR Formative Research
issn 2561-326X
publishDate 2020-10-01
description BackgroundGiven 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. ObjectiveGiven the wide use of this program, the purpose of this study is to update previous validation results with two newer versions of LIWC. MethodsTests 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. ResultsResults 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. ConclusionsTaken together, these results suggest that LIWC 2001 most accurately reflects the emotional identification of human coders.
url https://formative.jmir.org/2020/10/e18246
work_keys_str_mv AT mcdonnellmichelle identificationofemotionalexpressionwithcancersurvivorsvalidationoflinguisticinquiryandwordcount
AT owenjasonedward identificationofemotionalexpressionwithcancersurvivorsvalidationoflinguisticinquiryandwordcount
AT bantumerinocarroll identificationofemotionalexpressionwithcancersurvivorsvalidationoflinguisticinquiryandwordcount
_version_ 1721550524838313984