Linguists Out Men Impersonating Women On Twitter 350
Hugh Pickens writes "Remember when the Gay Girl in Damascus revealed himself as a middle-aged man from Georgia? On a platform like Twitter, which doesn't ask for much biographical information, it's easy (and fun!) to take on a fake persona but now linguistic researchers have developed an algorithm that can predict the gender of a tweeter based solely on the 140 characters they choose to tweet. The research is based on the idea that women use language differently than men. 'The mere fact of a tweet containing an exclamation mark or a smiley face meant that odds were a woman was tweeting, for instance,' reports David Zax. Other research corroborates these findings, finding that women tend to use emoticons, abbreviations, repeated letters and expressions of affection more than men and linguists have also developed a list of gender-skewed words used more often by women including love, ha-ha, cute, omg, yay, hahaha, happy, girl, hair, lol, hubby, and chocolate. Remarkably, even when only provided with one tweet, the program could correctly identify gender 65.9% of the time. (PDF). Depending on how successful the program is proven to be, it could be used for ad-targeting, or for socio-linguistic research."
Re:Recognizing gender 65.9% based on one tweet (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Gender Inequality (Score:3, Informative)
From TFA (http://images.fastcompany.com/upload/a_variousfields.png):
Feature: Accuracy
Baseline (Female): 54.9%
One tweet: 65.9%
Description: 71.2%
All tweets: 75.8%
Screen Name: 77.1%
Full Name: 89.1%
Tweets + screen name: 81.4%
Screen name + description + all tweets: 84.3%
All four fields: 92%
Honestly, 77% based on screen name alone was the most interesting result to me.
Re:man vs. machine (Score:4, Informative)
True. But there are people who are good at identifying those situations where the gender doesn't match the behavior. In real life, its called 'gaydar'. On line, it could just be a phony picture and a poser.
The gender-behavior mismatch is evident (I've been told) from the writing of the subjects in question. Not just the choice of words or little hearts where the periods should be, but based on the style of writing and subject matter. Apparently, a transcript of a conversation (or series of e-mails) between individuals produces a more accurate determination than an essay.
Yes, humans widely use language differently based on their own subcultures. Women particularly in some cultures speak an entirely different language from the gender-neutral language spoken by everyone. In some languages such as Japanese gendered language is extremely readily apparent, and when I was chatting on Japanese chatrooms, it was nice to be able to identify the gender of the speaker in one or two lines of text from them.
In much the same way, while we often are of the belief that men and women use language the same way in English, because it's not readily apparent, we do actually use language differently. Here is another interesting one: women use fewer contractions than men. Weird but oddly true.
All of this has less to do with "gaydar" than that every subculture speaks a slightly different dialect. Gay men have a selection of words that set them off, (I actually commented to a gay-rights group, where I was an "ally" of gay-rights, that they were using "fabulous" like... A LOT. And I was all, "um... do you REALLY want to be projecting the notion that this stereotype is valid and accurate? Because that is what you are doing.") and this does not mean that gay men talk like women. They actually talk differently and distinctly from women, but in this world of false dichotomies that we live in, we presume that if gay men don't talk the same way as straight men, then they must talk like women. But, in reality, this isn't actually correct.