Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Study on the Extraction of Dependency Links Between Different Personality Traits

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Medical research is constantly evolving which requires doctors to discover frequently new knowledge. However, the acquisition of new knowledge in the medical field requires careful handling of the quantity and variety of data for that there is a recourse to computer science. In this context, we aim in this paper, to detect the dependency links between the different personality traits to enrich the knowledge base of a psychiatrist. For this purpose, we benefit from various techniques: association rules mining, decision tree algorithm, rough set theory rules, and LSTM extension. These different techniques allowed us to check and validate the links obtained with different formats of results. The four mentioned methods are implemented and tested on the corpus PAN Clef 2015 (Author profiling). The accuracy measurement of association rules mining, supervised decision tree model, rough set theory rules, LSTM extension are respectively 0.94, 0.80, 0.89 and 0.83. The results obtained show that indeed, there is a link between the different personality traits which proves that these traits are dependent.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availibility Statement

The data used in this study are real, reference, and anonymous data which are obtained from PAN clef.

Notes

  1. are the items or questions to be answered to devise a scoring mechanism for traits identification.

  2. is a 10-item question set that has to be labeled between 0–4 score, where 0 = never, 1 = almost never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = fairly often and 4 = very often.

References

  1. Big Five personality traits-Wikipedia. [Online]. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bigiveersonalityraitsoldid=875501560. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  2. Salem MS, Ismail SS, Aref, M. Personality traits for egyptian twitter users dataset. In: Proceedings of the 2019 8th International Conference on Software and Information Engineering 2019; pp 206–211

  3. Holtzman NS, Tackman AM, Carey AL, Brucks MS, Küfner AC, Deters FG, Mehl MR. Linguistic markers of grandiose narcissism: a LIWC analysis of 15 samples. J Lang Soc Psychol. 2019;38(5–6):773–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ames DR, Rose P, Anderson CP. The NPI-16 as a short measure of narcissism. J Res Pers. 2006;40(4):440–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bills CB, Li G. Correlating homicide and suicide. Int J Epidemiol. 2005;34(4):837–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pennebaker JW, Francis ME, Booth RJ. Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2001. Mahway: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2001. p. 71.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw. 2010;36(3):1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pramodh KC, Vijayalata Y. Automatic personality recognition of authors using big five factor model. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Advances in Computer Applications (ICACA) 2016; pp. 32–37, IEEE.

  9. Rekik A, Jamoussi S, Hamadou AB. Violent Vocabulary Extraction Methodology: Application to the Radicalism Detection on Social Media. In International Conference on Computational Collective Intelligence. Springer, Cham, 2019;pp 97–109.

  10. Kumar N, Srinathan K. Automatic keyphrase extraction from scientific documents using N-gram filtration technique. In: Proceedings of the eighth ACM symposium on Document engineering 2008; pp. 199–208.

  11. Si H, Zhou J, Chen Z, Wan J, Xiong NN, Zhang W, Vasilakos AV. Association rules mining among interests and applications for users on social networks. IEEE Access. 2019;7:116014–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. LinkedIn-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinkedIn. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  13. Confidence -Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_rule_learning#cite_note-michael.hahsler.net-4. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020 .

  14. Support-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_rulelearning#cite_note-michael.hahsler.net-4. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  15. Conviction-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_rule_learning#cite_note-michael.hahsler.net-4. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  16. Lift-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_(data_mining). Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  17. Asthana P, Singh A, Singh D. A survey on association rule mining using Apriori based algorithm and hash based methods. Int J Adv Res Comput Sci Softw Eng. 2013;3(7):599–603.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Umar A, Qamar U. Detection and diagnosis of psychological disorders through decision rule set formation. In: 2019 IEEE 17th International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA) 2019; pp. 33–37. IEEE.

  19. Algorithm of Johnson-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithme_de_Johnson. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  20. Hvidsten TR. A tutorial-based guide to the ROSETTA system: a rough set toolkit for analysis of data. J Comput Commun 2010.

  21. Amoretti MC, Frixione M, Lieto A, Adamo G. Ontologies, mental disorders and prototypes. In: On the Cognitive, Ethical, and Scientific Dimensions of Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Cham, 2019; pp. 189–204.

  22. Huang Z, Hu Q, Wang H, Zhang Y, Yang J, Wang G. Semantic processing of personality description for depression patients. In: International Conference on Health Information Science. Springer, Cham, 2019; pp. 263–275.

  23. Cilibrasi RL, Vitanyi PM. The google similarity distance. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2007;19(3):370–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Beheshti A, Moraveji-Hashemi V, Yakhchi S, Motahari-Nezhad HR, Ghafari SM, Yang J. personality2vec: enabling the analysis of behavioral disorders in social networks. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on web search and data mining. 2020; pp. 825–828

  25. Beheshti A, Benatallah B, Nouri R, Tabebordbar A. CoreKG: a knowledge lake service. Proc VLDB Endow. 2018;11(12):1942–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Singh R, Du J, Zhang Y, Wang H, Miao Y, Sianaki OA, Ulhaq A. A framework for early detection of antisocial behavior on Twitter using natural language processing. In: Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems. Springer, Cham, 2019; pp. 484–495.

  27. Tf-idf: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tf-idf. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  28. Salem H, Ruiz A, Hernandez S, Wahid K, Cao F, Karnes B, Pigott T. Borderline personality features in inpatients with bipolar disorder: impact on course and machine learning model use to predict rapid readmission. J Psychiatr Pract. 2019;25(4):279–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jenisha PM, Jayaraman S, Yuvasri R, Jayakumar MED. Idisorder detection using machine learning. Int J Res Sci Eng Technol. 2019;6(3):12–8.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Celli F, Lepri B. Is big five better than MBTI? In: CLiC-it: A Personality Computing Challenge Using Twitter Data; 2018.

  31. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR. The revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R). London: Sage Publications Inc; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  32. Myers IB, Myers PB. Gifts differing: understanding personality type. London: Nicholas Brealey; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Marouf AA, Ashrafi AF, Ahmed T, Emon T. A machine learning based approach for mapping personality traits and perceived stress scale of undergraduate students. Int J Modern Educ Comput Sci (IJMECS). 2019;11(8):42–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rothmann S, Coetzer EP. The big five personality dimensions and job performance. SA J Ind Psychol. 2003;29(1):68–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Cohen S. Perceived stress in a probability sample of the United States, 1988.

  36. ARM-Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_rule_learning#cite_note-michael.hahsler.net-4. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  37. Hall M, Frank E, Holmes G, Pfahringer B, Reutemann P, Witten IH. The WEKA data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD Explor Newsl. 2009;11(1):10–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hornik K, Grün B, Hahsler M. arules—a computational environment for mining association rules and frequent item sets. J Stat Softw. 2005;14(15):1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Decision tree -Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_tree_learning. Accessed: 11 Jun 2020.

  40. Rangel Pardo FM, Celli F, Rosso P, Potthast M, Stein B, Daelemans W. Overview of the 3rd Author Profiling Task at PAN 2015. In: CLEF 2015 Evaluation Labs and Workshop Working Notes Papers, 2015; pp. 1–8

  41. Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J. Long short-term memory. Neural Comput. 1997;9(8):1735–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Schuster M, Paliwal KK. Bidirectional recurrent neural networks. IEEE Trans Signal Process. 1997;45(11):2673–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ma Y, Peng H, Cambria E. Targeted aspect-based sentiment analysis via embedding commonsense knowledge into an attentive LSTM. AAAI, 2018; pp 5876–5883.

  44. Malandri Lorenzo, Xing Frank Z, Orsenigo Carlotta, Vercellis Carlo, Cambria Erik. Public mood-driven asset allocation: the importance of financial sentiment in portfolio management. Cogn Comput. 2018;10(6):1167–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Spearman -Wikipedia. [Online]. Available: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corr%C3%A9lation_de_Spearman. Accessed: 25 Aug 2020.

  46. Gardiner EJ, Gillet VJ. Perspectives on knowledge discovery algorithms recently introduced in chemoinformatics: rough set theory, association rule mining, emerging patterns, and formal concept analysis. J Chem Inform Model. 2015;55(9):1781–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ellouze M, Mechti S, Belguith LH. Approach based on ontology and machine learning for identifying causes affecting personality disorder disease on Twitter. In: International Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. Springer, Cham, 2021; pp. 659–669.

  48. Kavitha M, Selvi ST. Comparative study on Apriori algorithm and Fp growth algorithm with pros and cons. Int J Comput Sci Trends Technol (I JCS T)-Volume, 4. 2016.

  49. Dharmaraajan K, Dorairangaswamy MA. Analysis of FP-growth and Apriori algorithms on pattern discovery from weblog data. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Advances in Computer Applications (ICACA). IEEE, 2016; pp. 170–174

  50. González-Gallardo CE, Montes A, Sierra G, Núnez-Juárez JA, Salinas-López AJ, Ek J. Tweets classification using corpus dependent tags. In: LEF (working notes): Character and POS N-grams; 2015.

  51. Zhang M, He C. Survey on association rules mining algorithms. In: Advancing computing, communication, control and management. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer; 2010. p. 111–8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Zhang Q, Xie Q, Wang G. A survey on rough set theory and its applications. CAAI Trans Intell Technol. 2016;1(4):323–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Gardiner EJ, Gillet VJ. Perspectives on knowledge discovery algorithms recently introduced in chemoinformatics: rough set theory, association rule mining, emerging patterns, and formal concept analysis. J Chem Inform Model. 2015;55(9):1781–803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ANLP Group, MIRACL Laboratory, FSEGS, University of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia

    Mourad Ellouze, Seifeddine Mechti & Lamia Hadrich Belguith

Authors
  1. Mourad Ellouze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seifeddine Mechti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lamia Hadrich Belguith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ME is currently a PhD student at Sfax University, Tunisia and a member of Multimedia, InfoRmation systems and Advanced Computing Laboratory (MIRACL). His research interests include natural language processing, ontology, data mining and Health informatics. SM obtained his thesis in computer science in 2018 from the Tunis Higher Institute of Management. He works on plagiarism detection and machine learning for classfication of documents. LHB is a Professor of Computer Science at Faculty of Economics and Management of Sfax (FSEGS)—University of Sfax (Tunisia). She is head of Arabic Natural language Research Group (ANLP-RG) of Multimedia, Information systems and Advanced Computing Laboratory (MIRACL).

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mourad Ellouze.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Rules

My manuscript complies with the Ethical Rules applicable for this journal. This project is part of a thesis. There is no conflict between the authors and everyone involved in this project according to their role fixed from the start.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no confict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the topical collection “Innovative AI in Medical Applications” guest edited by Lydia Bouzar-Benlabiod, Stuart H. Rubin and Edwige Pissaloux.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ellouze, M., Mechti, S. & Hadrich Belguith, L. A Comparative Study on the Extraction of Dependency Links Between Different Personality Traits. SN COMPUT. SCI. 3, 495 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01389-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-022-01389-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation