Skip to main content

A Comparative Study on Twitter Sentiment Analysis: Which Features are Good?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Natural Language Processing and Information Systems (NLDB 2015)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 9103))

Abstract

In this paper, investigations of Sentiment Analysis over a well-known Social Media Twitter were done. As literatures show that some works related to Twitter Sentiment Analysis have been done and delivered interesting idea of features, but there is no a comparative study that shows the best features in performing Sentiment Analysis. In total we used 9 feature sets (41 attributes) that comprise punctuation, lexical, part of speech, emoticon, SentiWord lexicon, AFINN-lexicon, Opinion lexicon, Senti-Strength method, and Emotion lexicon. Feature analysis was done by conducting supervised classification for each feature sets and continued with feature selection in subjectivity and polarity domain. By using four different datasets, the results reveal that AFINN lexicon and Senti-Strength method are the best current approaches to perform Twitter Sentiment Analysis.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.twitter.com.

  2. 2.

    http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/semeval-2013/.

References

  1. Bravo-Marquez, F., Mendoza, M., Poblete, B.: Combining strengths, emotions and polarities for boosting Twitter sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Issues of Sentiment Discovery and Opinion Mining, vol. 2 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Raaijmakers, S., Kraaij, W.: A shallow approach to subjectivity classification. In: ICWSM (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aisopos, F., Papadakis, G., Tserpes, K., Varvarigou, T.: Content vs. context for sentiment analysis: a comparative analysis over microblogs. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media, pp. 187–196 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Go, A., Bhayani, R., Huang, L.: Twitter sentiment classification using distant supervision. In: CS224N Project Report, Stanford (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Agarwal, A., Xie, B., Vovsha, I., Rambow, O., Passonneau, R.: Sentiment analysis of twitter data. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Languages in Social Media, pp. 30–38 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., Hoffmann, P.: Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 347–354 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Liu, B., Hu, M., Cheng, J.: Opinion observer: analyzing and comparing opinions on the web. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 342–351 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baccianella, S., Esuli, A., Sebastiani, F.: SentiWordNet 3.0: an enhanced lexical resource for sentiment analysis and opinion mining. In: LREC, vol. 10, pp. 2200–2204 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Affective norms for English words (ANEW): instruction manual and affective ratings. In: Technical report C-1, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida, pp. 1–45 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nielsen, F.A.: A new ANEW: evaluation of a word list for sentiment analysis in microblogs. in: arXiv preprint arXiv: 1103.2903 (2011)

  11. Mohammad, S.M., Turney, P.D.: Crowdsourcing a wordemotion association lexicon. Comput. Intell. 29(3), 436–465 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G.: Sentiment strength detection for the social web. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63(1), 163–173 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ekman, P.: An argument for basic emotions. Cogn. Emot. 6(3–4), 169–200 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Plutchik, R.: The Psychology and Biology of Emotion. HarperCollins College Publishers, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Speriosu, M., Sudan, N., Upadhyay, S., Baldridge, J.: Twitter polarity classification with label propagation over lexical links and the follower graph. In: Proceedings of the First workshop on Unsupervised Learning in NLP, pp. 53–63 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bird, S.: NLTK: the natural language toolkit. In: Proceedings of the COLING/ACL on Interactive Presentation Sessions, pp. 69–72 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fajri Koto .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Koto, F., Adriani, M. (2015). A Comparative Study on Twitter Sentiment Analysis: Which Features are Good?. In: Biemann, C., Handschuh, S., Freitas, A., Meziane, F., Métais, E. (eds) Natural Language Processing and Information Systems. NLDB 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9103. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19581-0_46

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19581-0_46

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-19580-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-19581-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics