4.4 Article

Semantic Measures: Using Natural Language Processing to Measure, Differentiate, and Describe Psychological Constructs

Journal

PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 92-115

Publisher

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/met0000191

Keywords

psychological assessment; natural language processing; latent semantic analyses

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council [2015-01229]
  2. Swedish Research Council [2015-01229] Funding Source: Swedish Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Psychological constructs, such as emotions, thoughts, and attitudes are often measured by asking individuals to reply to questions using closed-ended numerical rating scales. However, when asking people about their state of mind in a natural context (How are you?), we receive open-ended answers using words (Fine and happy!) and not closed-ended answers using numbers (7) or categories (A lot). Nevertheless, to date it has been difficult to objectively quantify responses to open-ended questions. We develop an approach using open-ended questions in which the responses are analyzed using natural language processing (Latent Semantic Analyses). This approach of using open-ended, semantic questions is compared with traditional rating scales in nine studies (N = 92-854), including two different study paradigms. The first paradigm requires participants to describe psychological aspects of external stimuli (facial expressions) and the second paradigm involves asking participants to report their subjective well-being and mental health problems. The results demonstrate that the approach using semantic questions yields good statistical properties with competitive, or higher, validity and reliability compared with corresponding numerical rating scales. As these semantic measures are based on natural language and measure, differentiate, and describe psychological constructs, they have the potential of complementing and extending traditional rating scales.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available