Personality, Gender, and Age in the Language of Social Media: The Open-Vocabulary Approach

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 9, 2013, Pages

  Schwartz, H Andrew ^a,b   Eichstaedt, Johannes C ^a   Kern, Margaret L ^a   Dziurzynski, Lukasz ^a   Ramones, Stephanie M ^a   Agrawal, Megha ^a,b   Shah, Achal ^b   Kosinski, Michal ^c   Stillwell, David ^c   Seligman, Martin E P ^a   Ungar, Lyle H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATIONAL STUDY; EMOTIONALITY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTROSPECTION; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NORMAL HUMAN; PERSONALITY; PERSONALITY TEST; PREDICTIVE VALUE; SEMANTICS; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIAL MEDIA; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

AGE FACTORS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; MALE; PERSONALITY; SEX FACTORS; SOCIAL MEDIA; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84884541833     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0073791     Document Type: Article

References (99)

1. Lazer D, Pentland A, Adamic L, Aral S, Barabasi AL, et al. (2009) Computational social science. Science 323: 721-723.
2. Weinberger S, (2011) Web of war: Can computational social science help to prevent or win wars? the pentagon is betting millions of dollars on the hope that it will. Nature 471: 566-568.
3. Miller G, (2011) Social scientists wade into the tweet stream. Science 333: 1814-1815.
4. Facebook (2012) Facebook company info: Fact sheet website. Available: http://newsroom.fb.com. Accessed 2012 Dec.
5. Golder S, Macy M, (2011) Diurnal and seasonal mood vary with work, sleep, and daylength across diverse cultures. Science 333: 1878-1881.
6. Bollen J, Mao H, Zeng X, (2011) Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational Science 2: 1-8.
7. Kramer A (2010) An unobtrusive behavioral model of gross national happiness. In: Proc of the 28th int conf on Human factors in comp sys. ACM, pp. 287-290.
8. Dodds PS, Harris KD, Kloumann IM, Bliss CA, Danforth CM, (2011) Temporal patterns of happiness and information in a global social network: Hedonometrics and twitter. PLoS ONE 6: 26.
9. Ginsberg J, Mohebbi M, Patel R, Brammer L, Smolinski M, et al. (2009) Detecting inuenza epidemics using search engine query data. Nature 457: 1012-1014.
10. Michel JB, Shen YK, Aiden AP, Veres A, Gray MK, et al. (2011) Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science 331: 176-182.
11. Pennebaker JW, Chung CK, Ireland M, Gonzales A, Booth RJ, (2007) The development and psychometric properties of liwc2007 the university of texas at austin. LIWCNET 1: 1-22.
12. Kosinski M, Stillwell D, Graepel Y (2013) Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
13. Goldberg LR, (1990) An alternative "description of personality": the big-five factor structure. J Pers and Soc Psychol 59: 1216-1229.
14. McCrae RR, John OP, (1992) An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality 60: 175-215.
15. Norman W, (1963) Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66: 574.
16. Digman J, (1990) Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual review of psychology 41: 417-440.
17. Stone P, Dunphy D, Smith M (1966) The General Inquirer: A Computer Approach to Content Analysis. MIT press.
18. Coltheart M, (1981) The mrc psycholinguistic database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 33: 497-505.
19. Pennebaker JW, Mehl MR, Niederhoffer KG, (2003) Psychological aspects of natural language use: our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology 54: 547-77.
20. Tausczik Y, Pennebaker J, (2010) The psychological meaning of words: Liwc and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29: 24-54.
21. Pennebaker J, King L, (1999) Linguistic styles: language use as an individual difference. Journal of personality and social psychology 77: 1296.
22. Mehl M, Gosling S, Pennebaker J, (2006) Personality in its natural habitat: manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life. Journal of personality and social psychology 90: 862.
23. Gosling S, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John O, (2004) Should we trust web-based studies? a comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist 59: 93.
24. Back M, Stopfer J, Vazire S, Gaddis S, Schmukle S, et al. (2010) Facebook profiles reect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science 21: 372-374.
25. Sumner C, Byers A, Shearing M (2011) Determining personality traits & privacy concerns from facebook activity. In: Black Hat Briefings. 1-29.
26. Holtgraves T, (2011) Text messaging, personality, and the social context. Journal of Research in Personality 45: 92-99.
27. Yarkoni T, (2010) Personality in 100,000 Words: A large-scale analysis of personality and word use among bloggers. Journal of Research in Personality 44: 363-373.
28. Chung C, Pennebaker J, (2008) Revealing dimensions of thinking in open-ended self-descriptions: An automated meaning extraction method for natural language. Journal of Research in Personality 42: 96-132.
29. Kramer A, Chung K (2011) Dimensions of self-expression in facebook status updates. In: Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. 169-176.
30. Pennebaker J, Stone L, (2003) Words of wisdom: Language use over the life span. Journal of personality and social psychology 85: 291.
31. Chung C, Pennebaker J (2007) The psychological function of function words. Social communication: Frontiers of social psychology: 343-359.
32. Argamon S, Koppel M, Pennebaker J, Schler J (2007) Mining the blogosphere: age, gender, and the varieties of self-expression. First Monday 12.
33. Argamon S, Koppel M, Fine J, Shimoni A, (2003) Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. To appear in Text 23: 3.
34. Newman M, Groom C, Handelman L, Pennebaker J, (2008) Gender differences in language use: An analysis of 14,000 text samples. Discourse Processes 45: 211-236.
35. Mukherjee A, Liu B (2010) Improving gender classification of blog authors. In: Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Empirical Methods in natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 207-217.
36. Rao D, Yarowsky D, Shreevats A, Gupta M (2010) Classifying latent user attributes in twitter. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Search and mining user-generated contents. ACM, pp. 37-44.
37. Schler J, Koppel M, Argamon S, Pennebaker J (2006) Effects of age and gender on blogging. In: Proceedings of 2006 AAAI Spring Symposium on Computational Approaches for Analyzing Weblogs. pp. 199-205.
38. Burger J, Henderson J, Kim G, Zarrella G (2011) Discriminating gender on twitter. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1301-1309.
39. Huffaker DA, Calvert SL, (2005) Gender, Identity, and Language Use in Teenage Blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10: 1-10.
40. Eckert P, (2008) Variation and the indexical field1. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12: 453-476.
41. Eisenstein J, Smith NA, Xing EP (2011) Discovering sociolinguistic associations with structured sparsity. In: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies-Volume 1. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1365-1374.
42. OConnor B, Bamman D, Smith NA, (2011) Computational text analysis for social science: Model assumptions and complexity. public health 41: 43.
43. Grimmer J, Stewart BM (2013) Text as data: The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Political Analysis.
44. Monroe BL, Colaresi MP, Quinn KM, (2008) Fightin'words: Lexical feature selection and evaluation for identifying the content of political conict. Political Analysis 16: 372-403.
45. Gilbert E (2012) Phrases that signal workplace hierarchy. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, pp. 1037-1046.
46. Tausczik Y, Pennebaker J, (2010) The psychological meaning of words: Liwc and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29: 24.
47. Holmes D, (1994) Authorship attribution. Computers and the Humanities 28: 87-106.
48. Argamon S, Šarić M, Stein SS (2003) Style mining of electronic messages for multiple authorship discrimination: first results. In: KDD '03: Proceedings of the ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp. 475-480.
49. Stamatatos E, (2009) A survey of modern authorship attribution methods. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology 60: 538-556.
50. Alm C, Roth D, Sproat R (2005) Emotions from text: machine learning for text-based emotion prediction. In: Proceedings of the conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 579-586.
51. Mihalcea R, Liu H (2006) A corpus-based approach to finding happiness. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Computational Approaches to Weblogs. p. 19.
52. Jurafsky D, Ranganath R, McFarland D (2009) Extracting social meaning: Identifying interactional style in spoken conversation. In: Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 638-646.
53. Ranganath R, Jurafsky D, McFarland D (2009) It's not you, it's me: detecting irting and its misperception in speed-dates. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: Volume 1-Volume 1. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 334-342.
54. Pang B, Lee L, Vaithyanathan S (2002) Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). 79-86.
55. Kim SM, Hovy E (2004) Determining the sentiment of opinions. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics, COLING,04.
56. Wilson T, Wiebe J, Hoffmann P, (2009) Recognizing contextual polarity: An exploration of features for phrase-level sentiment analysis. Computational linguistics 35: 399-433.
57. Baccianella S, Esuli A, Sebastiani F (2010) Sentiwordnet 3.0: An enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: Chair) NCC, Choukri K, Maegaard B, Mariani J, Odijk J, et al., editors, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'10). Valletta, Malta: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
58. Laver M, Benoit K, Garry J, (2003) Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review 97: 311-331.
59. Monroe BL, Maeda K (2004) Talks cheap: Text-based estimation of rhetorical ideal-points. In: annual meeting of the Society for Political Methodology. 29-31.
60. Slapin JB, Proksch SO, (2008) A scaling model for estimating time-series party positions from texts. American Journal of Political Science 52: 705-722.
61. Argamon S, Dhawle S, Koppel M, Pennebaker JW (2005) Lexical predictors of personality type. In: Proceedings of the Joint Annual Meeting of the Interface and the Classification Society.
62. Argamon S, Koppel M, Pennebaker JW, Schler J, (2009) Automatically profiling the author of an anonymous text. Commun ACM 52: 119-123.
63. Mairesse F,Walker M (2006) Automatic recognition of personality in conversation. In: Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the NAACL. 85-88.
64. Mairesse F, Walker M, Mehl M, Moore R, (2007) Using linguistic cues for the automatic recognition of personality in conversation and text. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 30: 457-500.
65. Golbeck J, Robles C, Edmondson M, Turner K (2011) Predicting personality from twitter. In: Proc of the 3rd IEEE Int Conf on Soc Comput. 149-156. doi:978-0-7695-4578-3/11.
66. Sumner C, Byers A, Boochever R, Park G (2012) Predicting dark triad personality traits from twitter usage and a linguistic analysis of tweets. wwwonlineprivacyfoundationorg.
67. Iacobelli F, Gill AJ, Nowson S, Oberlander J (2011) Large scale personality classification of bloggers. In: Proc of the 4th int conf on Affect comput and intel interaction. Springer-Verlag, pp. 568-577.
68. Bamman D, Eisenstein J, Schnoebelen T (2012) Gender in twitter: Styles, stances, and social networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:12104567.
69. Church KW, Hanks P, (1990) Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational Linguistics 16: 22-29.
70. Lin D (1998) Extracting collocations from text corpora. In: Knowledge Creation Diffusion Utilization. 57-63.
71. Anscombe FJ, (1948) The transformation of poisson, binomial and negative-binomial data. Biometrika 35: 246-254.
72. Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI, (2003) Latent dirichlet allocation. J Mach Learn Res 3: 993-1022.
73. Steyvers M, Griffiths T, (2007) Probabilistic topic models. Handbook of latent semantic analysis 427: 424-440.
74. Gelfand A, Smith A, (1990) Sampling-based approaches to calculating marginal densities. Journal of the American statistical association 85: 398-409.
75. McCallum AK (2002) Mallet: A machine learning for language toolkit. Available: http://mallet.cs.umass.edu.
76. Dunn OJ, (1961) Multiple comparisons among means. Journal of the American Statistical Association 56: 52-64.
77. Eisenstein J, O'Connor B, Smith N, Xing E (2010) A latent variable model for geographic lexical variation. In: Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1277-1287.
78. Wordle (2012) Wordle advanced website. Available: http://www{dot operator}wordle{dot operator}net/advanced Acceessed 2012 Dec.
79. Harris J (2011) Word clouds considered harmful. Available: http://wwwniemanlaborg/2011/10/word-clouds-considered-harmful/.
80. Resnik P, (1999) Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 11: 95-130.
81. Cleveland WS, (1979) Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the Am Stati Assoc 74: 829-836.
82. Costa Jr P, McCrae R, (2008) The revised neo personality inventory (neo-pi-r). The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment 2: 179-198.
83. Bachrach Y, Kosinski M, Graepel T, Kohli P, Stillwell D (2012) Personality and patterns of facebook usage. Web Science.
84. Sterne J, Gavaghan D, Egger M, (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 53: 1119-1129.
85. McCrae RR, Sutin AR (2009) Openness to experience. In: Handbook of Indiv Diff in Soc Behav, New York: Guilford. 257-273.
86. Mulac A, Studley LB, Blau S, (1990) The gender-linked language effect in primary and secondary students' impromptu essays. Sex Roles 23: 439-470.
87. Thomson R, Murachver T, (2001) Predicting gender from electronic discourse. Brit J of Soc Psychol 40: 193-208.
88. Mehl MR, Pennebaker JW, (2003) The sounds of social life: a psychometric analysis of students' daily social environments and natural conversations. J of Pers and Soc Psychol 84: 857-870.
89. Mulac A, Bradac JJ, (1986) Male/female language differences and attributional consequences in a public speaking situation: Toward an explanation of the genderlinked language effect. Communication Monographs 53: 115-129.
90. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B (Methodological): 289-300.
91. Goldberg L, Johnson J, Eber H, Hogan R, Ashton M, et al. (2006) The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. J of Res in Personal 40: 84-96.
92. Fan RE, Chang KW, Hsieh CJ, Wang XR, Lin CJ, (2008) LIBLINEAR: A library for large linear classification. Journal of Machine Learning Research 9: 1871-1874.
93. Hoerl A, Kennard R, (1970) Ridge regression: Biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems. Technometrics 12: 55-67.
94. Meyer G, Finn S, Eyde L, Kay G, Moreland K, et al. (2001) Psychological testing and psychological assessment: A review of evidence and issues. American psychologist 56: 128.
95. Roberts B, Kuncel N, Shiner R, Caspi A, Goldberg L, (2007) The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science 2: 313-345.
96. Ireland ME, Mehl MR (2012) Natural language use as a marker of personality. (in press) Oxford Handbook of Language and Social Psychology.
97. Haig B, (2005) An abductive theory of scientific method. Psychological Methods; Psychological Methods 10: 371.
98. Fast L, Funder D, (2008) Personality as manifest in word use: Correlations with self-report, acquaintance report, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94: 334.
99. Gosling SD, Vazire S, Srivastava S, John OP, (2000) Should we trust web-based studies? a comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires. American Psychologist 59: 93-104.