Determining the Polarity and Source of Opinions Expressed in Political Debates
In this paper we investigate different approaches we developed in order to classify opinion and discover opinion sources from text, using affect, opinion and attitude lexicon. We apply these approaches on the discussion topics contained in a corpus of American Congressional speech data. We propose three approaches to classifying opinion at the speech segment level, firstly using similarity measures to the affect, opinion and attitude lexicon, secondly dependency analysis and thirdly SVM machine learning. Further, we study the impact of taking into consideration the source of opinion and the consistency in the opinion expressed, and propose three methods to classify opinion at the speaker intervention level, showing improvements over the classification of individual text segments. Finally, we propose a method to identify the party the opinion belongs to, through the identification of specific affective and non-affective lexicon used in the argumentations. We present the results obtained when evaluating the different methods we developed, together with a discussion on the issues encountered and some possible solutions. We conclude that, even at a more general level, our approach performs better than trained classifiers on specific data.
Keywordsopinion mining opinion source mining LSA political discourse
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Balahur, A., Lloret, E., Ferrández, O., Montoyo, A., Palomar, M., Muñoz, R.: The DLSIUAES Team’s Participation in the TAC 2008 Tracks. In: Proceedings of the Text Analysis Conference 2008 Workshop, Washington, USA (2008)Google Scholar
- 3.Thomas, M., Pang, B., Lee, L.: Get out the vote: Determining support or opposition from Congressional floor-debate transcripts. In: Proceedings of EMNLP 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
- 4.Mullen, T., Malouf, R.: A preliminary investigation into sentiment analysis of informal political discourse. In: AAAI Symposium on Computational Approaches to Analysing Weblogs (AAAI-CAAW), pp. 159–162 (2006)Google Scholar
- 5.Turney, P., Mullen, T., Malouf, R.: A preliminary investigation into sentiment analysis of informal political discourse. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Computational Approaches to Analysing Weblogs (AAAI-CAAW 2002) (2002)Google Scholar
- 6.Pang, B., Lee, L., Vaithyanathan, S.: Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 79–86 (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.Dave, K., Lawrence, S., Pennock, D.: Mining the Peanut Gallery: Opinion Extraction and Semantic Classification of Product Reviews. In: Proceedings of WWW 2003 (2003)Google Scholar
- 8.Gamon, M.: Sentiment classification on customer feedback data: Noisy data, large feature vectors, and the role of linguistic analysis. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING) (2004)Google Scholar
- 10.Ng, V., Dasgupta, S., Arifin, S.M.N.: Examining the role of linguistic knowledge sources in the automatic identification and classification of reviews. In: Proceedings of the COLING/ACL Main Conference Poster Sessions, July 2006, pp. 611–618. Association for Computational Linguistics, Sydney (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Lin, W.-H., Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., Hauptmann, A.: Which side are you on? Identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels. In: Lin, et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL 2006) (2006)Google Scholar
- 14.Strapparava, C., Valitutti, A.: WordNet-Affect: an affective extension of WordNet. In: Proceedings ofthe 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004), Lisbon, pp. 1083–1086 (May 2004)Google Scholar
- 15.Scherer, K., Wallbott, H.G.: The ISEAR Questionnaire and Codebook (1997)Google Scholar
- 16.Balahur, A., Montoyo, A.: An Incremental Multilingual Approach to Forming a Culture Dependent Emotion Triggers Database. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Terminology and Knowledge Engineering (TKE 2008), Copenhagen (2008)Google Scholar