CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,624Mental Health via WritingAuthorship Attribution and ProfilingComputational and Text Analysis Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 136 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves

Pennebaker, James W., Mehl, Matthias R., Niederhoffer, Kate G.·2003·Annual Review of Psychology
DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The words people use in their daily lives can reveal important aspects of their social and psychological worlds. With advances in computer technology, text analysis allows researchers to reliably and quickly assess features of what people say as well as subtleties in their linguistic styles. Following a brief review of several text analysis programs, we summarize some of the evidence that links natural word use to personality, social and situational fluctuations, and psychological interventions. Of particular interest are findings that point to the psychological value of studying particles—parts of speech that include pronouns, articles, prepositions, conjunctives, and auxiliary verbs. Particles, which serve as the glue that holds nouns and regular verbs together, can serve as markers of emotional state, social identity, and cognitive styles.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041

Cites

136 of 136 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. 10.1037//0022-3514.70.5.996 · DOI
  2. 10.1037//0022-3514.79.4.631 · DOI
  3. Bucci W, 1981, Bull. Menninger Clin., 45, 334
  4. Campbell RS, 2002, Psychol. Sci.
  5. Coupland N, Coupland J. 2001. Language, ageing, and ageism. SeeRobinson & Giles 2001, pp. 465–86
  6. Eckert P, 1999, Language Variation as Social Practice: The Linguistic Construction of Identity in Belten High.
  7. Furnham A. 1990. Language and personality. In Handbook of Language and Social Psychology , ed. H Giles, WP Robinson, pp. 73–95. New York: Wiley
  8. Giles H, 1991, Language: Contexts and Consequences.
  9. Gortner EM, 2002, J. Soc. Clin. Psychol.
  10. 10.1037//0033-2909.86.3.616 · DOI
  11. Hart RP. 2001. Redeveloping DICTION: theoretical considerations. SeeWest 2001, pp. 43–60 · DOI
  12. Hogenraad R, 1995, J. Soc. Behav. Personal., 10, 491
  13. 10.1037//0033-2909.88.3.614 · DOI
  14. Jeanneau M. 1991. Word pattern and psychological structure: empirical studies of words and expressions related to personality organization . PhD thesis. Dep. Applied Psychol., Umeå Univ., Sweden
  15. 10.1037//0033-295X.104.2.211 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Lepore SJ, 2002, The Writing Cure.
  17. McCarthy D, 1929, J. Genet. Psychol., 36, 583
  18. Mehrabian A, 1971, J. Exp. Res. Personal., 5, 64
  19. Miller G, 1995, The Science of Words.
  20. 10.1093/hcr/27.1.121 · DOI
  21. Newman ML, 2002, Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.
  22. 10.1037//0021-843X.95.3.274 · DOI
  23. Pennebaker JW, 2001, Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC): LIWC 2001.
  24. 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1296 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1037//0022-3514.72.4.863 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1037//0278-6133.4.3.219 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Scherer K. 1979. Personality markers in speech. SeeSherer & Giles 1979, pp. 147–209
  28. Scherwitz L, Canick J. 1988. Self reference and coronary heart disease risk. In Type A Behavior Pattern: Research, Theory, and Intervention , ed. K Houston, CR Snyder, pp. 146–67. New York: Wiley
  29. Scherwitz L, 1985, Advances, 2, 6
  30. Sebeok TA, 1960, Style and Language.
  31. 10.1207/153248302760179101 · DOI
  32. Tannen D, 1994, Gender Discourse.
  33. Winter DG, 1973, The Power Motive.
  34. 10.1037//0003-066X.43.9.673 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 2,624

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
ORCID
Venue
Annual Review of Psychology
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2003-02
Volume
54
Issue
1
Pages
547-577
ISSN
  • 0066-4308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-2085
DOI
10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
OpenAlex
W2100772444
Cited by
2,624
References
137
Citations by year
2026: 158 · 2025: 149 · 2024: 167 · 2023: 174 · 2022: 166 · 2021: 159 · 2020: 165 · 2019: 163 · 2018: 157 · 2017: 139 · 2016: 151 · 2015: 129 · 2014: 136 · 2013: 97 · 2012: 116
FWCI
3.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CLOK (University of Central Lancashire) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH052391, MH52391)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Authorship Attribution and Profiling
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Keywords
natural language use, text analysis, personality, language style, particles, parts of speech, pronouns, prepositions, auxiliary verbs, emotional state, social identity, cognitive style, psychological intervention, self-representation
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Emotions, Health Status, Humans, Individuality, Interpersonal Relations, Mental Health, Natural Language Processing, Personality, Psycholinguistics, Semantics, Social Environment, Verbal Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review