Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Search
Sentiment analysis tools should take account of the number of exclamation marks!!!
Teh P., Rayson P., Pak I., Piao S.  iiWAS 2015 (Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, Brussels, Belgium, Dec 11-13, 2015)1-6.2015.Type:Proceedings
Date Reviewed: Jun 7 2016

Is it a good idea to have a spam filter rule that rejects messages containing more than one exclamation mark in the subject line? This paper considers the authorial sentiments ascribed to communications containing one or more exclamation marks, and the consequences of those sentiments for automated methods of determining frame of mind from written text. Results reported by the paper suggest that exclamation mark frequency of occurrence proportionally amplifies a reader’s subjective impression of an author’s sentiments.

Sentiment analysis involves text, punctuation, and other forms of (usually folk) orthography. This paper hypothesizes the significance of exclamation marks in accurate sentiment determination, and reports on experiments set up to test the hypothesis. The experiments compared the sentiment analysis of six online tools to the sentiment analysis made by humans. The tools analyzed a set of approximately 1,000 website comments in various areas, and the humans analyzed a 30-comment subset. Experiment results showed that exclamation mark occurrence had almost no effect on automatic sentiment analysis, while it caused strong and significant bias in human sentiment judgments.

Alas, this paper doesn’t directly answer the question posed at the start of this review, but it does suggest amplifying the results of spam filter, and sentiment, analysis in proportion to the number of exclamation marks used. The paper is a short and straightforward read, although apparently only half of the experiments conducted are described. Reference is made to other work providing more details.

Reviewer:  R. Clayton Review #: CR144475 (1608-0595)
Bookmark and Share
  Reviewer Selected
 
 
Linguistic Processing (H.3.1 ... )
 
 
Social Networking (H.3.4 ... )
 
 
Content Analysis And Indexing (H.3.1 )
 
Would you recommend this review?
yes
no
Other reviews under "Linguistic Processing": Date
Anatomy of a text analysis package
Reed A. Information Systems 9(2): 89-96, 1984. Type: Article
Jun 1 1985
Dependency parsing for information retrieval
Metzler D., Noreault T., Richey L., Heidorn B.  Research and development in information retrieval (, King’s College, Cambridge,3241984. Type: Proceedings
Oct 1 1985
Automated medical office records
Gabrieli E. Journal of Medical Systems 11(1): 59-68, 1987. Type: Article
Nov 1 1988
more...

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2024 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy