skip to main content
10.1145/1099554.1099714acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Using appraisal groups for sentiment analysis

Published:31 October 2005Publication History

ABSTRACT

Little work to date in sentiment analysis (classifying texts by `positive' or `negative' orientation) has attempted to use fine-grained semantic distinctions in features used for classification. We present a new method for sentiment classification based on extracting and analyzing appraisal groups such as ``very good'' or ``not terribly funny''. An appraisal group is represented as a set of attribute values in several task-independent semantic taxonomies, based on Appraisal Theory. Semi-automated methods were used to build a lexicon of appraising adjectives and their modifiers. We classify movie reviews using features based upon these taxonomies combined with standard ``bag-of-words'' features, and report state-of-the-art accuracy of 90.2%. In addition, we find that some types of appraisal appear to be more significant for sentiment classification than others.

References

  1. S. Argamon and J. T. Dodick. Conjunction and modal assessment in genre classification. In AAAI Spring Symp. on Exploring Attitude and Affect in Text, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Eric Brill. A simple rule-based part of speech tagger. In Proc. of ACL Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Trento, Italy, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. N. Cristianini and J. Shaw-Taylor. An Introduction to Support Vector Machines. Cambridge Press, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. J. R. Curran. Ensemble methods for automatic thesaurus extraction. In Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 222--229, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. Dave and S. Lawrence. Mining the peanut gallery: opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews. In Proc. Twelfth Int'l World Wide Web Conference (WWW2003), 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Michael A. K. Halliday. Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold, second edition, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. V. Hatzivassiloglou and K. R. McKeown. Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives. In P. R. Cohen and W. Wahlster, editors, Proc. 35th ACL and 8th EACL, pages 174--181, Somerset, New Jersey, 1997. ACL. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. V. Hatzivassiloglou and J. Wiebe. Effects of adjective orientation and gradability on sentence subjectivity. In Proc. 18th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Daniel Marcu. The rhetorical parsing of unrestricted texts: a surface-based approach. Computational Linguistics, 26(3):395--448, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. J. R. Martin and P. R. R. White. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave, London, 2005. (http://grammatics.com/appraisal/).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Christian Matthiessen. Lexico-grammatical cartography: English systems. International Language Sciences Publishers, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Tony Mullen and Nigel Collier. Sentiment analysis using support vector machines with diverse information sources. In Dekang Lin and Dekai Wu, editors, Proceedings of EMNLP-2004, pages 412--418, Barcelona, Spain, July 2004. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T. Nasukawa and J. Yi. Sentiment analysis: Capturing favorability using natural language processing. In Proc. 2nd Int'l Conf. on Knowledge Capture, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Bo Pang and Lillian Lee. A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. In Proc. 42nd ACL, pages 271--278, Barcelona, Spain, July 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Bo Pang, Lillian Lee, and Shivakumar Vaithyanathan. Thumbs up? sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In Proceedings of EMNLP, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J. Platt. Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal optimization. In B. Scholkopf, C Burges, and A. Smola, editors, Advances in Kernel Methods - Support Vector Learning. MIT Press, 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Y. Qu, J. G. Shanahan, and J. Wiebe, editors. AAAI Spring Symposium on Exploring Attitude and Affect in Text. AAAI Press, Stanford University, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Taboada and J. Grieve. Analyzing appraisal automatically. In AAAI Spring Symposium on Exploring Attitude and Affect in Text. AAAI, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Peter D. Turney. Thumbs up or thumbs down? semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In Proceedings 40th Annual Meeting of the ACL (ACL'02), pages 417--424, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Casey Whitelaw, Maria Herke-Couchman, and Jon Patrick. Identifying interpersonal distance using systemic features. In AAAI Spring Symp. on Exploring Attitude and Affect in Text, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. J. Wiebe. Recognizing Subjective Sentences: A Computational Investigation of Narrative Text. PhD thesis, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1990. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Theresa Wilson, Janyce Wiebe, and Rebecca Hwa. Just how mad are you? finding strong and weak opinion clauses. In Proc. 19th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Ian H. Witten and Frank Eibe. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java Implementations. Morgan Kaufmann, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Using appraisal groups for sentiment analysis

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CIKM '05: Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management
            October 2005
            854 pages
            ISBN:1595931406
            DOI:10.1145/1099554

            Copyright © 2005 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 31 October 2005

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            CIKM '05 Paper Acceptance Rate77of425submissions,18%Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

            Upcoming Conference

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader