Advertisement

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 205–235 | Cite as

Revealing Word Order: Using Serial Position in Binomials to Predict Properties of the Speaker

  • Rumen Iliev
  • Anastasia Smirnova
Article

Abstract

Three studies test the link between word order in binomials and psychological and demographic characteristics of a speaker. While linguists have already suggested that psychological, cultural and societal factors are important in choosing word order in binomials, the vast majority of relevant research was focused on general factors and on broadly shared cultural conventions. In contrast, in this work we are interested in what word order can tell us about the particular speaker. More specifically, we test the degree to which word order is affected by factors such as gender, race, geographic location, religion, political orientation, and consumer preferences. Using a variety of methodologies and different data sources, we find converging evidence that word order is linked to a broad set of features associated with the speaker. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings and the potential to use word order as a tool for analyzing large text corpora and data on the web.

Keywords

Word order Binomials Subjective distance On-line data  Automated text analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Doug Medin, Sonya Sachdeva, bethany ojalehto and Veronica Gerassimova for suggestions and comments on the paper. This work was supported by a DRMS Grant—NSF SES 0962185.

References

  1. Allan, K. (1987). Hierarchies and the choice of left conjuncts (with particular attention to English). Journal of Linguistics, 23(1), 51–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Argamon, S., Koppel, M., Fine, J., & Shimoni, A. (2003). Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text, 23(3), 321–346.Google Scholar
  3. Back, M. D., Küfner, A. C. P., & Egloff, B. (2010). The emotional timeline of September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1417–1419.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Benor, S., & Levy, R. (2006). The chicken or the egg? A probabilistic analysis of English binomials. Language, 82(2), 233–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, R. (1986). Social psychology: The second edition. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Byrne, B., & Davidson, E. (1985). On putting the horse before the cart: Exploring conceptual bases of word order via acquisition of a miniature artificial language. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(4), 377–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chung, C. K., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008). Revealing dimensions of thinking in open-ended self-descriptions: An automated meaning extraction method for natural language. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 96–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper, W., & Ross, J. (1975). World order. In R. E. Grossman, L. J. San, & T. J. Vance (Eds.), Papers from the parasession on functionalism (pp. 63–111). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
  9. Cromwell, R. (1956). Factors in the serial recall of names of acquaintances. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 53(1), 63–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cutler, A., McQueen, J., & Robinson, K. (1990). Elizabeth and John: Sound patterns of men’s and women’s names. Journal of Linguistics, 26(2), 471–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dam, G., & Kaufmann, S. (2008). Computer assessment of interview data using latent semantic analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 40(1), 8–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dehghani, M., Gratch, J., Sachdeva, S., & Sagae, K. (2011). Analyzing conservative and liberal blogs related to the construction of the ‘Ground Zero Mosque’. In L. Carlson (Ed.), Proceedings of the 33th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston, MA (pp. 1853–1858).Google Scholar
  13. Diermeier, D., Godbout, J., Yu, B., & Kaufmann, S. (2011). Language and ideology in congress. British Journal of Political Science, 42(1), 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fenk-Oczlon, G. (1989). Word frequency and word order in freezes. Linguistics, 27(3), 517–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hegarty, P., Watson, N., Fletcher, K., & McQueen, G. (2011). When are gentlemen first and ladies last? Effects of gender stereotypes on the order of romantic partners’ names. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 21–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Herdagdelen, A., & Baroni, M. (2011). Stereotypical gender actions can be extracted from web text. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(9), 1653–1666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Inagaki, K. (1990). The effects of raising animals on children’s biological knowledge. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 8(2), 119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2002). Young children’s thinking about the biological world. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kelly, M., Bock, J., & Keil, F. (1986). Prototypicality in linguistic context: Effects on sentence structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu, B. (2010). Sentiment analysis and subjectivity. In N. Indurkhya & F. J. Damerau (Eds.), Handbook of natural language processing (2nd ed., pp. 627–666). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  21. MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (Eds.). (1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Malkiel, Y. (1959). Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua, 8, 113–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Matlin, M., & Stang, D. J. (1978). The Pollyanna principle: Selectivity in language, memory, and thought. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.Google Scholar
  24. Matlin, M. W., & Underhill, W. A. (1979). Selective rehearsal and selective recall. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 14(5), 389–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Matlin, M., Stang, D., Gawron, V., Freedman, A., & Derby, P. (1979). Evaluative meaning as a determinant of spew position. The Journal of General Psychology, 100(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McDonald, J., Bock, J., & Kelly, M. (1993). Word and world order: Semantic, phonological and metrical determinants of serial position. Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 188–230.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Medin, D., & Atran, S. (2004). The native mind: Biological categorization, reasoning and decision making in development across cultures. Psychological Review, 111(4), 960–983.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Michel, J.-B., Shen, Y. K., Aiden, A. P., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., The\_Google\_Books\_Team, Pickett, J. P., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S., Nowak, M., & Lieberman-Aiden,E. (2011). Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science, 331(6014), 176–182.Google Scholar
  29. Mollin, S. (2012). Revisiting binomial order in English. Ordering constraints and reversibility. English Language and Linguistics, 16(1), 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mukherjee, A., & Liu, B. (2010). Improving gender classification of blog authors. In Proceedings of the 2010 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (pp. 207–217). Cambridge, MA: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  31. Myers, G. (1915). Affective factors in recall. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 12(4), 85–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Newman, M. L., Groom, C. J., Handelman, L. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2008). Gender differences in language use: An analysis of 14,000 text samples. Discourse Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 45(3), 211–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008). Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 2(1–2), 1–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pinker, S., & Birdsong, D. (1979). Speakers’ sensitivity to rules of frozen word order. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18(4), 497–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Riedel, E., Dexter, S. L., Scharber, C., & Doering, A. (2006). Experimental evidence on the effectiveness of automated essay scoring in teacher education cases. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(3), 267–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ross, N., Medin, D. L., Coley, J. D., & Atran, S. (2003). Cultural and experiential differences in the development of folkbiological induction. Cognitive Development, 18(1), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rozin, P., Berman, L., & Royzman, E. B. (2010). Biases in use of positive and negative words across twenty natural languages. Cognition and Emotion, 24(3), 536–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rude, S. S., Gortner, E. M., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students. Cognition and Emotion, 18(8), 1121–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sagi, E., Kaufmann, S., & Clark, B. (2009). Semantic density analysis: comparing word meaning across time and phonetic space. In R. Basili & M. Pennacchiotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the EACL 2009 Workshop on GEMS: Geometrical Models of Natural Language Semantics, Greece, Athens (pp. 104–111).Google Scholar
  40. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(2), 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tausczik, Y., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2010). The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(1), 24–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Wright, S., Hay, J., & Bent, T. (2005). Ladies first? Phonology, frequency, and the naming conspiracy. Linguistics, 43(3), 531–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yarkoni, T. (2010). The abbreviation of personality, or how to measure 200 personality scales with 200 items. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(2), 180–198.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Yarkoni, T. (2012). Psychoinformatics: New horizons at the interface of the psychological and computing sciences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(6), 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yu, B., Kaufmann, S., & Diermeier, D. (2008). Classifying party affiliation from political speech. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(1), 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, Pt.2), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10(6), 224–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations