Data Mining Reveals the Emotional Differences In Emails From Men and Women 100
KentuckyFC writes "Sentiment analysis relies on vast databases of common words which are marked as positive, negative or neutral and associated with one of the eight fundamental emotions: joy, trust, fear, surprise, sadness, discuss, anger and anticipation. It is then a straightforward matter to search Tweets, novels and even fairy tales to see what emotions appear. Now, researchers have carried out the first large-scale study of sentiment in workplace emails. They examined the emotions associated with words in over 30,000 emails and analyzed the emotional differences between messages sent by men and women. It turns out that women use more cheerful words in emails than men, that men use more fear words, especially when communicating with other men, and that both men and women are far more likely to use anticipation words when emailing a member of the opposite sex. The same researchers say they are developing a Google app that will allow users to track their own emotions towards the people they correspond with in Gmail. And they plan to make a public call for volunteers willing to share their data for research purposes."
Re: (Score:2)
nah thats already pretty well documented
Re: (Score:1)
I think that's a bunch of FUD.
Fear is the minecraft killer
Re: (Score:1)
I second that emotion.
--Smokey
Other findings (Score:5, Funny)
1) Men's emails are 90% more likely to include the word "balls" than women's.
2) Men are 74% less likely to ever email someone a link to an Oprah Magazine story.
3) No man has ever used the phrase "K, Luv Ya!" in an email, ever.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Other findings (Score:5, Funny)
In other news, today we found out that at least 0.00007% of Slashdot users believe that discussion comments are email.
"fear" words et al (Score:3, Interesting)
Even the journal article linked to by the blog seems to be scant on details. I was hoping there'd at least be a few appendices on these things, but no such luck. Anyone know exactly what "joy words," "fear words," et al are?
Thanks in advance.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you have asked an insightful question here. TFA says only:
It's the content of that database that critically determines whether the findings of the textual analysis are any good. That database could be very carefully constructed by a transparent and rigorous process, with extensive validation against
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From the research paper:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A sarcasm detector that works here would be worth its weight in digitalis. Or Maalox.
Re: (Score:2)
Utter bollocks, gay men are not 26% of the population and even then most of them have more sense than that...
Discuss? (Score:3)
I'm not sure I ever felt discussing, though since I'm discussing it, I guess... I am discussed.
Re: (Score:2)
(Caveat: I'm a widower and not interested in remarrying.)
Re: (Score:2)
I get extremely disgusted when people confuse discuss and disgust. One is an emotion. One is what women always do. One is an emotion you can see on women's faces when they look towards a slashdot user.
That's three you discussing swine!
Re: (Score:2)
My emotional response (Score:1)
fuck you
second, hey they choose to use google...
google app probably not needed (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
a google app is just going to tell people things that they already know about themselves.
That app will do well, anything to parrots ourselves back to us will have mass appeal.
Re: (Score:1)
i think people probably already have a good idea about what they actually think about the other people that they email back and forth with. a google app is just going to tell people things that they already know about themselves.
One might be surprized. At one point my daughter pointed out to me that I was falling in love with somebody even before I was aware of it myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What the F$&*? Talk about a big fat fallacy! (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course men and women use different language in their emails. Young men would use different language than middle aged or older people do. A person emailing a friend would have different language than when they email their boss. This is not indicative of there "emotions". This is indicative of their education, wisdom, and who they are having a conversation with and the topics of discussion.
This whole article discusses work done on an absolutely false premise. Emails can not be used to determine your e
Re: (Score:2)
Email language also vary based on where you're from, what your history is, your income level, your education level, how many fingers you've lost to chainsaws...
I think Slashdot had an article a while back about being able to use your email language to track down individual people because there are so many different variables.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It is then a straightforward matter to search Tweets, novels and even fairy tales to see what emotions appear. Now, researchers have carried out the first large-scale study of sentiment in workplace emails. They examined the emotions associated with words in over 30,000 emails and analyzed the emotional differences between messages sent by men and women.
If you are determining that someone is of an emotion, you are determining their emotional state. If you are determining an emotional difference, you must know two states of emotion. Logic and reason is not very complex, but many people choose not to use either.
Re: (Score:1)
If you are determining that someone is of an emotion, you are determining their emotional state. If you are determining an emotional difference, you must know two states of emotion. Logic and reason is not very complex, but many people choose not to use either.
Slow down. Read it again, it says "emotions associated with words" and "emotional differences between messages". That says nothing about emotional state. Nor does it imply those are the true emotions of the authors. This is about how men and women use language differently. Why you read so much more into that, I don't know.
Re: (Score:2)
It is apparent that you missed "The same researchers say they are developing a Google app that will allow users to track their own emotions towards the people they correspond with in Gmail."
If you choose to ignore what the article claims that is not my issue, but yours. I didn't read anything into the article, I read the whole article.
Re: (Score:1)
Of course men and women use different language in their emails. Young men would use different language than middle aged or older people do. A person emailing a friend would have different language than when they email their boss. This is not indicative of there "emotions". This is indicative of their education, wisdom, and who they are having a conversation with and the topics of discussion.
I don't the researchers claim that the words directly reflect the writers emotions. When people write persuasively they instead try to stir emotions in their readers. For example, if I write: "I am deaply concerned that our current strategy exposes us to unnecessary risk." I am fear words in the hope that my readers will take what I have to say more seriously.
Re: (Score:2)
You could just as easily use those words due to ignorance and be repeating what you heard someone else say, and not intentionally using fear correct? How would a person or application be able to discern the difference? It can't because, as with any language, there is a tremendous amount of subjectivity in the words.
To take this a bit further, we often apply emotional words in an exactly different theme than our emotion. Take satire as a massive example. Another smaller example would be the person who ju
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, do I give any hint that communication in any medium is different (internet vs. diary vs. book)? The point I raise is not that you can't harm someone in a communication, the point is that you can't know their intent by the words chosen from a single email.
If I was to analyze a threaded communication, I would get an idea that it's possible your "piss off" email was a joke and not malicious. Having no such thread and looking at the "piss off" email I can make no such speculation rationally, and sh
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly what language give you the idea that I claim that a communication could not cause harm? I never make that claim, and make no implication. I claim that communications are subjective.
This is not indicative of there "emotions". This is indicative of their education, wisdom, and who they are having a conversation with and the topics of discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pack it in you eugenics morons! We are on to your game!
I sense irritation and a vague sense of intellectual superiority...
Woah... James Randi, here I come!
Re: (Score:2)
Irritation? I think it's worse than that with the eugenics people. I side with Socrates over the Sophists, and despise this type of rhetoric for the same reasons. Philosophy should not be used for personal gain, but should be used for bettering society. I may actually be irritated because people are repeatedly being duped by the same propaganda, and on a site where people are supposed to be intellectuals it's befuddling that the same rhetorical tricks seem to always work.
In the last year, there have bee
Fascinating! (Score:4, Funny)
Fascinating!
Let's try the same thing with song lyrics:
Mama Cass:
Stars shining bright above you
Night breezes seem to whisper "I love you"
Birds singing in the sycamore tree
Dream a little dream of me
Say "Night-ie night" and kiss me
Just hold me tight and tell me you'll miss me
While I'm alone and blue as can be
Dream a little dream of me
Stars fading but I linger on, dear
Still craving your kiss
I'm longing to linger till dawn, dear
Just saying this
Sweet dreams till sunbeams find you
Sweet dreams that leave all worries behind you
But in your dreams whatever they be
Dream a little dream of me
And DJ Assault:
(2x)
Ass, titties, ass 'n titties
Ass ass titties titties, ass 'n titties
(2x)
Big booty bitches thats where it gets
Come on, hoe, let's go to the easy rest
When I see ass, titties, ass 'n titties
Ass, ass, titties, titties, ass 'n titties.
(4x)
Ass, ass, ass, ass
(2x)
If you a light-skinned bitch that think you the shit,
I can buy you, hoe, 'cause bitch I'm rich.
I see broke-ass hoes, broke-ass hoes,
Broke-ass hoes, broke-ass hoes.
(4x)
Hoes, hoes, hoes, hoes
(2x)
If you a freaky-dancin' ho, keep shakin' that shit
Let's see how you shake it on top of my dick
And you'll say "Assault, I'm cuming. Assault, I'm cuming.
"Assault, I'm cuming. Assault, I'm cuming."
(4x)
Cumin', Cumin', Cumin', Cumin'
(2x)
Stankin ass bitches that need to wash up
Dont get mad when i dont want to fuck
You need soap and water, soap and water
Soap and water, Soap and Water
(4x)
Water, Water, Water, Water
The difference is subtle, but in my opinion quite discernible.
Re: (Score:1)
That's sexist! (Score:5, Funny)
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go open a jar of mayo for the little lady, though that in no way suggests she lacks the wrist and forearm strength to grasp and twist just as well as any man.
Re: (Score:1)
Males and females have absolutely no difference between them, despite the overwhelming experiential, physiological, neurological, anatomical, and hormonal evidence to the contrary, you sexist pigs, and how dare you even conduct this research into the issue!
I realize you're joking, but sexism (or racism, or class-ism, etc.) is not noticing that real differences exist, rather it is the value judgement assigned to those differences.
Re: (Score:1)
There is a real value difference between the sexes. You can't just pretend the differences don't matter. Being larger makes boys better at sports. Having a monthly period is a negative value (I don't think anyone disagrees with that, although it does come with a benefit of being able to have children).
Pretending that the differences don't provide benefit to one side of the other is just silly.
Re: (Score:1)
> Being larger makes boys better at sports.
No, it doesn't. It gives them a potential advantage at sports.
This is exactly the problem with making such a big fuss about the differences between the sexes, whatever they may be. My Y chromosome did not make me particularly athletic (like many Slashdot readers, I suspect), and my girlfriend can out-wrestle me. But your casual phrasing suggests that this should be impossible, because it paints both of us with an extremely broad brush.
It gets worse with fuzzi
Re: (Score:2)
> Being larger makes boys better at sports.
No, it doesn't. It gives them a potential advantage at sports.
This is exactly the problem with making such a big fuss about the differences between the sexes, whatever they may be. My Y chromosome did not make me particularly athletic (like many Slashdot readers, I suspect), and my girlfriend can out-wrestle me. But your casual phrasing suggests that this should be impossible, because it paints both of us with an extremely broad brush.
It gets worse with fuzzier aptitudes like math, which is stereotypically believed to be a male discipline for... some reason or another. But today's NYT article [nytimes.com] suggests that perhaps there are fewer women in math and sciences because we tell women they can't do math and sciences.
So yes, all else being an equal, a man will probably be stronger than a woman who's done the same training. But a woman who's done any training at all will be stronger than the vast majority of men who haven't, and insisting that "men are better at sports" will discourage women from bothering at all (and earn scorn towards both men and women who don't fit the mold).
What is the use in such a distinction between potential advantage and just plain old advantage? A larger size really does seem to be a plain old advantage in many sports and a disadvantage in others.
Why can't it be a little from column A and a little from column B? Or a lot from one and a little from the other? Of course the golem effect [wikipedia.org] is probably discouraging women from science, but on average, they may also just be worse at it, simultaneously. If that is the case, then is it in our best interests t
Re: (Score:3)
Being larger makes boys better at sports.
Being larger makes a person better at sports where greater size (which is probably a proxy for muscle mass here) is an advantage. I'm not certain that, in all sports, a big muscle-bound person would be better than, say, a slim wiry person.
Boys are, on average, larger, but, then, the average person has (approximately) one ovary and one testicle. A larger boy would be better than a smaller boy at a sport where greater size is an advantage, but a larger girl might be better than that same smaller boy at tha
Re: (Score:2)
The "advantage" men have ovar women exists moslty at the highest levels of sports that focus on strength and lung capacity. Maybe the solution is to introduce more sports that focus on flexibility such as gymnastics. Admittedly judging such events is going to be more subjective than a game where you breast the tape or lift up a fixed series of weights.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I cannot speak for Sexism, but Racism is very clearly defined as believing that the Races have differences, or that "The Races" exist at all.
I do not believe that is a very good definition, but that is what many people use and what you will find on Wikipedia, for example (and many others).
I think it is mostly a European thing, I think I might have something to do with overcompensating for the Nazis.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a way of describing certain concrete physical characteristics. I like having names for things.
Of course, then we go overboard and start assigning intelligence and other nurture things to them...
Re: (Score:2)
Because height and strength are not influenced by nurture.
Re: (Score:2)
Depending what diet you feed your kids and the physical activities you encourage them to do, sure. You can't, however, say, "Son...stop being black."
Re: (Score:2)
Worked for Michael Jackson.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying there are no genetic factors for intelligence? Because, that seems like a nice pc thing to say but totally erroneous.
If our discussions of race are pure 'nature' or pure 'nurture', then I think we're just appealing to one human vanity or the other.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't say anything about the ratio of nature to nurture. I'm just saying society sometimes tells me a term I use solely to describe a certain group of people--with no intention of implied connotations--is unacceptable because apparently society can't use any word to describe the group without someone considering it a slur. I'm a programmer. I call a duck a fucking duck.
wisnoskij says there's no such thing as race; you say race is an indicator for intelligence. I think I should put you two in a cage with
Re: (Score:2)
First, mod this +Funny. I'm out of points.
and how dare you even conduct this research into the issue!
Stand by for a lot more politically incorrect research being done by AI researchers. Sociologists, psychologists and linguists have known about this stuff for years. But it has been a 'no go' area of research, thanks to many institutes of higher learning PC policies. Now, enter the software geeks, necessarily lacking social skills. Give them a sizable corpus of training material and look what pops out.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, one gots innies, t'other, outies; moral of story, get 'er done.
Fellow a ways above in regard the menses pointed out the positive aspect: "although it does come with a benefit of being able to have children." I can't remember speaking with a mother who at some point doesn't nigh gush on the wonder, the thrill, the immense sense of fulfillment yadda yadda, yet I have privately (ere now) suspected it was at least also a gigantic shared myth and mythos preventing the fairer sex from running amok.
Some tim
Re: (Score:2)
Males and females have absolutely no difference between them, despite the overwhelming experiential, physiological, neurological, anatomical, and hormonal evidence to the contrary, you sexist pigs, and how dare you even conduct this research into the issue! Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go open a jar of mayo for the little lady, though that in no way suggests she lacks the wrist and forearm strength to grasp and twist just as well as any man.
I find your sentiment absolutely discussing!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Males and females have absolutely no difference between them, despite the overwhelming experiential, physiological, neurological, anatomical, and hormonal evidence to the contrary, you sexist pigs, and how dare you even conduct this research into the issue! Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go open a jar of mayo for the little lady, though that in no way suggests she lacks the wrist and forearm strength to grasp and twist just as well as any man.
It's pretty clear her grasp and twist capability is far superior to yours, she's just not using it on the jar.
Re: (Score:2)
Browser history is even more revealing (Score:5, Funny)
Feelings (Score:2)
"eight fundamental emotions: joy, trust, fear, surprise, sadness, discuss, anger and anticipation"
Great. When my wife tells me I need to be more open about my feelings I just need to discuss the relative merits of procedural and nonprocedural programming languages
anticipa-a-a-a-a-tion (Score:2)
I anticipate having a gigundamous brain orgasm when I process the data.
It's what I live for; it's what I write e-mails for; it's what I read comments for but then feel ashamed and disgusted.
Again, useless. (Score:2)
I have serious doubts that any program could determine the actual "emotional" meaning of that phrase.
The problem with all research of this nature is that human language is filled with reverses of logic and emotion in order to convey more subtle states of thought. Not to mention, as a writer I frequently change to a feminine voice for either a specific third person effect or simply dialogue for
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid you just haven't yet explored how amazing this wonderful research truly is.
I just can't wait until people begin applying critical thinking skills in email to present a more pleasant and normalized tone!
It really pisses me off that sarcasm can be mistaken as revulsion or praise by dumb machines.
I trust you to understand the pain this causes me, human.
Re: (Score:1)
Computational methods and multiple gendered styles (Score:1)
It's kind of retrograde, limited, and descriptively inadequate to insist on defining men and women first by gender. An alternative would be to cluster people by using a common vocabulary. You'll still get lots of gender stuff coming out but you can reflect the fact that there are lots of different ways to "do" gender. This is something we all know--there's not just one type of guy, nor one type of woman and gender--while often relevant--isn't always.
Here's a paper on the matter. "Computational sociolingu