Evaluating the Validity of Computerized Content Analysis Programs for Identification of Emotional Expression in Cancer Narratives
Evaluating the Validity of Computerized Content Analysis Programs for Identification of Emotional Expression in Cancer Narratives
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0014643
复制
发表时间：
2009-03-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Owen, Jason E.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bantum, Erin O'Carroll;Owen, Jason E.
心理干预提供的语言数据对于测试行动机制和改进干预方法特别有用。在本研究中，通过评估者编码和 2 种计算机编码方法（语言查询和字数统计 [LIWC] 以及精神科内容分析和诊断 [PCAD]）对针对乳腺癌女性 (n = 63) 的基于互联网的干预中的情绪表达进行了分析。尽管计算机编码方法捕获了评估者识别的大部分情绪（LIWC 敏感性 = .88；PCAD 敏感性 = .83），但两者都过度识别了情绪表达（LIWC 阳性预测值 = .31；PCAD 阳性预测值 = .19）。相关分析表明 LIWC 具有更好的收敛效度和判别效度。结果强调了常用的计算机化内容分析程序中以前未被认识到的缺陷，并建议对这两个程序进行潜在的修改，以提高自动识别情绪表达的整体准确性。尽管作者认识到这些局限性，但他们得出的结论是，在快速识别文本中的情感表达方面，LIWC 优于 PCAD。
Psychological interventions provide linguistic data that are particularly useful for testing mechanisms of action and improving intervention methodologies. For this study, emotional expression in an Internet-based intervention for women with breast cancer (n = 63) was analyzed via rater coding and 2 computerized coding methods (Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count [LIWC] and Psychiatric Content Analysis and Diagnosis [PCAD]). Although the computerized coding methods captured most of the emotion identified by raters (LIWC sensitivity = .88; PCAD sensitivity = .83), both over-identified emotional expression (LIWC positive predictive value = .31; PCAD positive predictive value = .19). Correlational analyses suggested better convergent and discriminant validity for LIWC. The results highlight previously unrecognized deficiencies in commonly used computerized content-analysis programs and suggest potential modifications to both programs that could improve overall accuracy of automated identification of emotional expression. Although the authors recognize these limitations, they conclude that LIWC is superior to PCAD for rapid identification of emotional expression in text.