Choosing the best tools for comparative analyses of texts

被引:5
|
作者
Mollet, Eugene [1 ]
Wray, Alison [3 ]
Fitzpatrick, Tess [1 ]
Wray, Naomi R. [2 ]
Wright, Margaret J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Swansea, Swansea SA2 8PP, W Glam, Wales
[2] Royal Brisbane Hosp, Queensland Inst Med Res, Genet Epidemiol Lab, Brisbane, Qld 4029, Australia
[3] Cardiff Univ, Ctr Language & Commun Res, Cardiff CF10 3EU, S Glam, Wales
关键词
text analysis; profiling; variation; quantitative analysis; lexis; CORE SKILLS TEST; LINGUISTIC ABILITY; EARLY-LIFE; METAPHOR COMPREHENSION; ALZHEIMERS-DISEASE; COGNITIVE FUNCTION; LANGUAGE; NEUROPATHOLOGY; ACQUISITION; COHESION;
D O I
10.1075/ijcl.15.4.01mol
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
What measurements should linguists use when comparing texts written by different writers? We report aspects of a systematic evaluation of 381 different language measures derived from 200 analytic tools, carried out during the pilot for a study exploring genetic contributions to language variation. The measures covered lexis, structure, meaning, and discourse features, and were evaluated with a focus on capturing numerically the qualitative features that linguists consider central to differentiating one text from another. We review principles for selecting analytic tools, and the choices faced by the researcher in processing and analysing data. We then identify and demonstrate five of the measures, which between them provide a useful profile of different linguistic features, and note correlations with psychometric measures taken for each writer. We conclude with some caveats regarding general issues of validity and some indications about potential links between our work and research into authorship attribution for forensic purposes.
引用
收藏
页码:429 / 473
页数:45
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Approaches to interpreting and choosing the best treatments in network meta-analyses
    L. Mbuagbaw
    B. Rochwerg
    R. Jaeschke
    D. Heels-Andsell
    W. Alhazzani
    L. Thabane
    Gordon H. Guyatt
    [J]. Systematic Reviews, 6
  • [2] Approaches to interpreting and choosing the best treatments in network meta-analyses
    Mbuagbaw, L.
    Rochwerg, B.
    Jaeschke, R.
    Heels-Andsell, D.
    Alhazzani, W.
    Thabane, L.
    Guyatt, Gordon H.
    [J]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2017, 6
  • [3] Choosing "The Best"
    Linehan, David C.
    Jaques, David
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2011, 146 (05) : 604 - 605
  • [4] Speed and time, texts and sentences Choosing the best metric for relating reading rate to comprehension
    Biancarosa, Gina
    [J]. WRITTEN LANGUAGE AND LITERACY, 2005, 8 (02): : 79 - 100
  • [5] Diversity of primary hepatocytes models allow for choosing the best tools for hepatotoxicity assessments
    Froget, Guillaume
    Ekue, Lucie
    Simon, Florian
    Kitchener, Pierre
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGICAL AND TOXICOLOGICAL METHODS, 2018, 93 : 138 - 138
  • [6] Best practices for building and curating databases for comparative analyses
    Schwanz, Lisa E.
    Gunderson, Alex
    Iglesias-Carrasco, Maider
    Johnson, Michele A.
    Kong, Jacinta D.
    Riley, Julia
    Wu, Nicholas C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BIOLOGY, 2022, 225
  • [7] CHOOSING BEST PRACTICES
    HARMON, R
    JACKSON, RB
    LOVAN, R
    MCCORMICK, SF
    PATRICK, R
    SMITH, GC
    [J]. JOURNAL AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION, 1994, 86 (10): : 18 - &
  • [8] Choosing the best medications
    Chambliss, ML
    [J]. AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 1996, 53 (08) : 2565 - 2570
  • [9] Choosing the best flowmeter
    Swearingen, C
    [J]. CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, 1999, 106 (07) : 62 - 68
  • [10] Choosing the best location
    Scott, H
    [J]. AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL, 2004, 144 (08): : 599 - 600