Learning subjective language
Abstract
Subjectivity in natural language refers to aspects of language used to express opinions, evaluations, and speculations. There are numerous natural language processing applications for which subjectivity analysis is relevant, including information extraction and text categorization. The goal of this work is learning subjective language from corpora. Clues of subjectivity are generated and tested, including low-frequency words, collocations, and adjectives and verbs identified using distributional similarity. The features are also examined working together in concert. The features, generated from different data sets using different procedures, exhibit consistency in performance in that they all do better and worse on the same data sets. In addition, this article shows that the density of subjectivity clues in the surrounding context strongly affects how likely it is that a word is subjective, and it provides the results of an annotation study assessing the subjectivity of sentences with high-density features. Finally, the clues are used to perform opinion piece recognition (a type of text categorization and genre detection) to demonstrate the utility of the knowledge acquired in this article.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Big data text analysis enables the use of manual judgments to identify parameters for disambiguating instances of automatically identified clues.
“it must be noted that big data text analysis enables us to use manual judgments to identify parameters for disambiguating instances of automatically identified clues [119].”
From Safety of creatine supplementation: analysis of the prevalence of reported side effects in clinical trials and adverse event reports (2025) · cites this paper as [119]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sentiment strength detection in short informal text
Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., Cai, D., & Kappas, A. (2010) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21416 · Cited by 1,449 · see citing works
Using linguistic cues for the automatic recognition of personality in conversation and text
Mairesse, F., Walker, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Moore, R. K. (2007) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.2349 · Cited by 1,046 · see citing works
Mohammad, S. M. (2016) · Emotion Measurement · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-100508-8.00009-6 · Cited by 391 · see citing works
Rosé, C., Wang, Y.-C., Cui, Y., Arguello, J., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2008) · International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning · doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9034-0 · Cited by 351 · see citing works
Understanding and Mitigating Worker Biases in the Crowdsourced Collection of Subjective Judgments
Hube, C., Fetahu, B., & Gadiraju, U. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300637 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Kreider, R. B., Gonzalez, D. E., Hines, K., Gil, A., & Bonilla, D. A. (2025) · Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · doi:10.1080/15502783.2025.2488937 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Learning Lexico-Functional Patterns for First-Person Affect
Reed, L., Wu, J., Oraby, S., Anand, P., & Walker, M. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-2022 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
“Was it “stated” or was it “claimed”?: How linguistic bias affects generative language models
Patel, R., & Pavlick, E. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.790 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wiebe, J., Wilson, T., Bruce, R., Bell, M., & Martin, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- University of North Carolina at Asheville (US)
- New Mexico State University (US)
- Venue
- Computational Linguistics
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2004-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 277-308
- ISSN
- 0891-2017 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9312
- OpenAlex
- W2133341045
- Cited by
- 748
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 43 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 64
- FWCI
- 22.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computational Linguistics (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- subjective language, subjectivity detection, opinion words, low-frequency words, collocations, distributional similarity, feature density, text classification
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