Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining

2018 Edition
| Editors: Reda Alhajj, Jon Rokne

Semantic Sentiment Analysis of Twitter Data

  • Preslav Nakov
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7131-2_110167

Synonyms

Glossary

Sentiment Analysis

This is text analysis aiming to determine the attitude of a speaker or a writer with respect to some topic or the overall contextual polarity of a piece of text

Definition

Sentiment analysis on Twitter is the use of natural language processing techniques to identify and categorize opinions expressed in a tweet, in order to determine the author’s attitude toward a particular topic or in general. Typically, discrete labels such as positive, negative, neutral, and objective are used for this purpose, but it is also possible to use labels on an ordinal scale, or even continuous numerical values.

Introduction

Internet and the proliferation of smart mobile devices have changed the way information is created, shared, and spread, e.g., microblogs such as Twitter, weblogs such as LiveJournal, social networks such as Facebook, and instant messengers such as Skype and WhatsApp are now commonly used to...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Baccianella S, Esuli A, Sebastiani F (2010) SentiWordNet 3.0: an enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on language resources and evaluation, LREC ‘10 Valletta, MaltaGoogle Scholar
  2. Balchev D, Kiprov Y, Koychev I, Nakov P (2016) PMI-cool at SemEval-2016 task 3: experiments with PMI and goodness polarity lexicons for community question answering. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, SemEval ‘16, San Diego, California, USA, pp 844–850Google Scholar
  3. Barbosa L, Feng J (2010) Robust sentiment detection on Twitter from biased and noisy data. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on computational linguistics, COLING ‘10, Beijing, China, pp 36–44Google Scholar
  4. Bifet A, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Gavalda R (2011) Detecting sentiment change in Twitter streaming data. J Mach Learn Res, Proceedings Track vol 17, pp 5–11Google Scholar
  5. Bollen J, Mao H, Zeng XJ (2011) Twitter mood predicts the stock market. J Comput Sci 2(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borge-Holthoefer J, Magdy W, Darwish K, Weber I (2015) Content and network dynamics behind Egyptian political polarization on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing, CSCW ‘15, Vancouver, Canada, pp 700–711Google Scholar
  7. Burton S, Soboleva A (2011) Interactive or reactive? Marketing with twitter. J Consum Mark 28(7):491–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Church KW, Hanks P (1990) Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Comput Linguist 16(1):22–29Google Scholar
  9. Das SR, Chen MY (2007) Yahoo! For Amazon: sentiment extraction from small talk on the web. Manag Sci 53(9):1375–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davidov D, Tsur O, Rappoport A (2010a) Enhanced sentiment learning using Twitter hashtags and smileys. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on computational linguistics: posters, COLING ‘10, Beijing, China, pp 241–249Google Scholar
  11. Davidov D, Tsur O, Rappoport A (2010b) Semi-supervised recognition of sarcastic sentences in Twitter and Amazon. In: Proceedings of the fourteenth conference on computational natural language learning, CoNLL ‘10, Uppsala, Sweden, pp 107–116Google Scholar
  12. Deriu J, Gonzenbach M, Uzdilli F, Lucchi A, De Luca V, Jaggi M (2016) SwissCheese at SemEval-2016 task 4: sentiment classification using an ensemble of convolutional neural networks with distant supervision. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘16, San Diego, California, USA, pp 1124–1128Google Scholar
  13. Dodds PS, Harris KD, Kloumann IM, Bliss CA, Danforth CM (2011) Temporal patterns of happiness and information in a global social network: Hedonometrics and twitter. PLoS One 6(12)Google Scholar
  14. Esuli A, Sebastiani F (2006) SENTIWORDNET: a publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In: Proceedings of the international conference on language resources and evaluation, LREC ‘06, Genoa, Italy, pp 417–422Google Scholar
  15. Forman G (2008) Quantifying counts and costs via classification. Data Min Knowl Disc 17(2):164–206MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gao W, Sebastiani F (2015) Tweet sentiment: from classification to quantification. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on advances in social network analysis and mining, ASONAM ‘15, Paris, France, pp 97–104Google Scholar
  17. Ghosh A, Li G, Veale T, Rosso P, Shutova E, Barnden J, Reyes A (2015) SemEval-2015 task 11: sentiment analysis of figurative language in Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘15, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp 470–478Google Scholar
  18. Gimpel K, Schneider N, O’Connor B, Das D, Mills D, Eisenstein J, Heilman M, Yogatama D, Flanigan J, Smith NA (2011) Part-of-speech tagging for Twitter: annotation, features, and experiments. In: Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, ACL-HLT ‘11, Portland, Oregon, USA, pp 42–47Google Scholar
  19. Hu M, Liu B (2004) Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, KDD ‘04, Seattle, Washington, USA, pp 168–177Google Scholar
  20. Jansen B, Zhang M, Sobel K, Chowdury A (2009) Twitter power: tweets as electronic word of mouth. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 60(11):2169–2188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Java A, Song X, Finin T, Tseng B (2007) Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities. In: Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on web mining and social network analysis, pp 56–65Google Scholar
  22. Jovanoski D, Pachovski V, Nakov P (2016) On the impact of seed words on sentiment polarity lexicon induction. In: Proceedings of the 26th international conference on computational linguistics, COLING ‘16 Osaka, JapanGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaya M, Fidan G, Toroslu IH (2013) Transfer learning using Twitter data for improving sentiment classification of Turkish political news. In: Proceedings of the 28th international symposium on computer and information sciences, ISCIS ‘13, Paris, France, pp 139–148Google Scholar
  24. Kiritchenko S, Zhu X, Mohammad SM (2014) Sentiment analysis of short informal texts. J Artif Intell Res 50:723–762Google Scholar
  25. Kiritchenko S, Mohammad SM, Salameh M (2016) SemEval-2016 task 7: determining sentiment intensity of English and Arabic phrases. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘16 San Diego, California, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. Kong L, Schneider N, Swayamdipta S, Bhatia A, Dyer C, Smith NA (2014) A dependency parser for tweets. In: Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, EMNLP ‘14, Doha, Qatar, pp 1001–1012Google Scholar
  27. Kouloumpis E, Wilson T, Moore J (2011) Twitter sentiment analysis: the good the bad and the OMG! In: Proceedings of the fifth international conference on weblogs and social media, ICWSM ‘11, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain, pp 538–541Google Scholar
  28. Kwak H, Lee C, Park H, Moon S (2010) What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW ‘10, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA, pp 591–600Google Scholar
  29. Liu B, Zhang L (2012) A survey of opinion mining and sentiment analysis. In: Aggarwal CC, Zhai C (eds) Mining text data. Springer, New York, pp 415–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marchetti-Bowick M, Chambers N (2012) Learning for microblogs with distant supervision: political forecasting with Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 13th conference of the European chapter of the association for computational linguistics, EACL ‘12, Avignon, France, pp 603–612Google Scholar
  31. Mihalcea R, Banea C, Wiebe J (2007) Learning multilingual subjective language via crosslingual projections. In: Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the association of computational linguistics, ACL ‘07, Prague, Czech Republic, pp 976–983Google Scholar
  32. Mihaylov T, Nakov P (2016) Hunting for troll comments in news community forums. In: Proceedings of the 54th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ACL ‘16, Berlin, Germany, pp 399–405Google Scholar
  33. Mihaylov T, Georgiev G, Nakov P (2015a) Finding opinion manipulation trolls in news community forums. In: Proceedings of the nineteenth conference on computational natural language learning, CoNLL ‘15, Beijing, China, pp 310–314Google Scholar
  34. Mihaylov T, Koychev I, Georgiev G, Nakov P (2015b) Exposing paid opinion manipulation trolls. In: Proceedings of the international conference recent advances in natural language processing, RANLP ‘15, Hissar, Bulgaria, pp 443–450Google Scholar
  35. Mohammad, S (2012) #Emotional tweets. In: Proceedings of *SEM 2012: the first joint conference on lexical and computational semantics – volume 1: proceedings of the main conference and the shared task, *SEM ‘12, Montreal, Canada, pp 246–255Google Scholar
  36. Mohammad S, Kiritchenko S, Zhu X (2013) NRC-Canada: building the state-of-the-art in sentiment analysis of tweets. In: Proceedings of the second Joint conference on lexical and computational semantics (*SEM), volume 2: proceedings of the seventh international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘13, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, pp 321–327Google Scholar
  37. Mohammad SM, Kiritchenko S, Sobhani P, Zhu X, Cherry C (2016) SemEval-2016 task 6: detecting stance in tweets. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘16, San Diego, California, USA, pp 31–41Google Scholar
  38. Nakov P, Rosenthal S., Kozareva Z, Stoyanov V, Ritter A, Wilson T (2013) SemEval-2013 task 2: sentiment analysis in Twitter. In: Proceedings of the second joint conference on lexical and computational semantics (*SEM), volume 2: proceedings of the seventh international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’13, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, pp 312–320Google Scholar
  39. Nakov, P., Marquez L, Moschitti A, Magdy W, Mubarak H, Freihat AA, Glass J, Randeree B (2016a) SemEval-2016 task 3: community question answering. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’16, San Diego, California, USA, pp 525–545Google Scholar
  40. Nakov P, Rosenthal S, Kiritchenko S, Mohammad SM, Kozareva Z, Ritter A, Stoyanov V, Zhu X (2016b) Developing a successful SemEval task in sentiment analysis of twitter and other social media texts. Lang Resour Eval 50(1):35–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. O’Connor B, Balasubramanyan R, Routledge B, Smith N (2010) From tweets to polls: linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on weblogs and social media, ICWSM ‘10, Washington, DC, USA, pp 122–129Google Scholar
  42. Owoputi O, Dyer C, Gimpel K, Schneider N (2012) Part-of-speech tagging for Twitter: word clusters and other advances. Tech. Rep. CMU-ML-12-107, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Pak A, Paroubek P (2010) Twitter based system: using Twitter for disambiguating sentiment ambiguous adjectives. In: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’10, Uppsala, Sweden, pp 436–439Google Scholar
  44. Pang B, Lee L (2005) Seeing stars: exploiting class relationships for sentiment categorization with respect to rating scales. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ACL ‘05, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, pp 115–124Google Scholar
  45. Pang B, Lee L (2008) Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundation Trend Inform Retriev 2(1–2):1–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pang B, Lee L, Vaithyanathan S (2002) Thumbs up?: sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In: Proceedings of the conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, EMNLP ‘02, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, pp 79–86Google Scholar
  47. Pennebaker JW, Francis ME, Booth RJ (2001) Linguistic inquiry and word count. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  48. Pontiki M, Papageorgiou H, Galanis D, Androutsopoulos I, Pavlopoulos J, Manandhar S (2014) SemEval-2014 task 4: aspect based sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’14, Dublin, Ireland, pp 27–35Google Scholar
  49. Pontiki M, Galanis D, Papageorgiou H, Manandhar S, Androutsopoulos I (2015) SemEval2015 task 12: aspect based sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘15, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp 486–495Google Scholar
  50. Pontiki M, Galanis D, Papageorgiou H, Androutsopoulos I, Manandhar S, AL-Smadi M, Al-Ayyoub M, Zhao Y, Qin B, De Clercq O, Hoste V, Apidianaki M, Tannier X, Loukachevitch N, Kotelnikov E, Bel N, Jimenez-Zafra SM, Eryigit G (2016) SemEval-2016 task 5: aspect based sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the 10th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’16, San Diego, California, USA, pp 19–30Google Scholar
  51. Qureshi MA, O’Riordan C, Pasi G (2013) Clustering with error estimation for monitoring reputation of companies on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 9th Asia information retrieval societies conference, AIRS ‘13, Singapore, pp 170–180Google Scholar
  52. Ratkiewicz J, Conover M, Meiss M, Goncalves B, Patil S, Flammini A, Menczer F (2011) Truthy: mapping the spread of astroturf in microblog streams. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference companion on World Wide Web, WWW ’11, Hyderabad, India, pp 249–252Google Scholar
  53. Raychev V, Nakov P (2009) Language-independent sentiment analysis using subjectivity and positional information. In: Proceedings of the international conference on recent advances in natural language processing, RANLP ’09, Borovets, Bulgaria, pp 360–364Google Scholar
  54. Ritter A, Clark S, Mausam EO (2011) Named entity recognition in tweets: an experimental study. In: Proceedings of the conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, EMNLP ’11, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, pp 1524–1534Google Scholar
  55. Rosenthal S, Ritter A, Nakov P, Stoyanov V (2014) SemEval-2014 task 9: sentiment analysis in Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation, SemEval ‘14, Dublin, Ireland, pp 73–80Google Scholar
  56. Rosenthal S, Nakov P, Kiritchenko S, Mohammad S, Ritter A, Stoyanov V (2015) SemEval2015 task 10: sentiment analysis in Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ‘15, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp 450–462Google Scholar
  57. Russo I, Caselli T, Strapparava C (2015) SemEval-2015 task 9: CLIPEval implicit polarity of events. In: Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’15, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp 442–449Google Scholar
  58. dos Santos C, Gatti M (2014) Deep convolutional neural networks for sentiment analysis of short texts. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on computational linguistics, COLING ’14, Dublin, Ireland, pp 69–78Google Scholar
  59. Sebastiani F (2002) Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Comput Surv 34(1):1–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Severyn A, Moschitti A (2015a) On the automatic learning of sentiment lexicons. In: Proceedings of the 2015 conference of the north american chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, NAACL-HLT ‘15, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp 1397–1402Google Scholar
  61. Severyn A, Moschitti A (2015b) Twitter sentiment analysis with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Proceedings of the 38th international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, SIGIR ’15, Santiago, Chile, pp 959–962Google Scholar
  62. Socher R, Huval B, Manning CD, Ng AY (2012) Semantic compositionality through recursive matrix-vector spaces. In: Proceedings of the 2012 joint conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and computational natural language learning, EMNLPCoNLL ’12, Jeju Island, Korea, pp 1201–1211Google Scholar
  63. Socher R, Perelygin A, Wu J, Chuang J, Manning CD, Ng A, Potts C (2013) Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, EMNLP ’13. Seattle, Washington, USA, pp 1631–1642Google Scholar
  64. Stone PJ, Dunphy DC, Smith MS, Ogilvie DM (1966) The general inquirer: a computer approach to content analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  65. Stoyanov V, Cardie C (2008) Topic identification for fine-grained opinion analysis. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on computational linguistics, COLING ’08, Manchester, United Kingdom, pp. 817–824Google Scholar
  66. Strapparava C, Mihalcea R (2007) SemEval-2007 task 14: affective text. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’07, Prague, Czech Republic, pp 70–74Google Scholar
  67. Tang D, Wei F, Yang N, Zhou M, Liu T, Qin B (2014) Learning sentiment-specific word embedding for Twitter sentiment classification. In: Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ACL ’14, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, pp 1555–1565Google Scholar
  68. Tumasjan A, Sprenger T, Sandner P, Welpe I (2010) Predicting elections with Twitter: what 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on weblogs and social media, ICWSM ’10, Washington, DC, USA, pp 178–185Google Scholar
  69. Turney PD (2002) Thumbs up or thumbs down?: semantic orientation applied to unsupervised classification of reviews. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ACL ’02, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, pp 417–424Google Scholar
  70. Villena-Roman J, Lana-Serrano S, Martınez-Camara E, Cristobal JCG (2013) TASS workshop on sentiment analysis at SEPLN. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 50:37–44Google Scholar
  71. Wan X (2009) Co-training for cross-lingual sentiment classification. In: Proceedings of the joint conference of the 47th annual meeting of the ACL and the 4th international joint conference on natural language processing of the AFNLP, ACL-AFNLP ’09, Singapore, pp 235–243Google Scholar
  72. Wang X, Liu Y, SUN C, Wang B, Wang X (2015) Predicting polarities of tweets by composing word embeddings with long short-term memory. In: Proceedings of the 53rd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics and the 7th international joint conference on natural language processing, ACL-IJCNLP ’15, Beijing, China, pp 1343–1353Google Scholar
  73. Wiebe J, Wilson T, Bruce R, Bell M, Martin M (2004) Learning subjective language. Comput Linguist 30(3):277–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wiebe J, Wilson T, Cardie C (2005) Annotating expressions of opinions and emotions in language. Lang Resour Eval 39(2–3):165–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wilson T, Wiebe J, Hoffmann P (2005) Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the conference on human language technology and empirical methods in natural language processing, HLT-EMNLP ’05, Vancouver, Canada, pp 347–354Google Scholar
  76. Zhu X, Guo H, Mohammad SM, Kiritchenko S (2014a) An empirical study on the effect of negation words on sentiment. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, ACL ’14, Baltimore, MD, USA, pp 304–313Google Scholar
  77. Zhu X, Kiritchenko S, Mohammad SM (2014b) NRC-Canada-2014: detecting aspects and sentiment in customer reviews. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on semantic evaluation, SemEval ’14, Dublin, Ireland, pp 437–442Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Qatar Computing Research Institute, HBKUDohaQatar

Section editors and affiliations

  • Giovanni Semeraro
    • 1
  • Cataldo Musto
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Bari "Aldo Moro"BariItaly
  2. 2.BariItaly