Article published in:
Mental Model Ascription by Intelligent Agents
Edited by Marjorie McShane
[Interaction Studies 15:3] 2014
► pp. 359–387

Can you read my mindprint?

Automatically identifying mental states from language text using deeper linguistic features

| University of California, Irvine
| University of California, Irvine

Humans routinely transmit and interpret subtle information about their mental states through the language they use, even when only the language text is available. This suggests humans can utilize the linguistic signature of a mental state (its mindprint), comprised of features in the text. Once the relevant features are identified, mindprints can be used to automatically identify mental states communicated via language. We focus on the mindprints of eight mental states resulting from intentions, attitudes, and emotions, and present a mindprint-based machine learning technique to automatically identify these mental states in realistic language data. By using linguistic features that leverage available semantic, syntactic, and valence information, our approach achieves near-human performance on average and even exceeds human performance on occasion. Given this, we believe mindprints could be very valuable for intelligent systems interacting linguistically with humans. Keywords: mental state; linguistic features; mindprint; natural language processing; information extraction

Keywords: natural language processing, mental state, linguistic featuresmindprint, information ext
Published online: 06 February 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.15.3.01pea
References
Anand, P., King, J., Boyd-Graber, J., Wagner, E., Martell, C., Oard, D., & Resnik, P
(2011) Believe me – We can do this! Annotating persuasive acts in blog text. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument . San Francisco, CA: AAAI.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S
(1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chaffar, S., & Inkpen, D
(2011) Using a heterogeneous dataset for emotion analysis in text. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 66571, 62–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, C., Sudhof, M., Jurafsky, D., Leskovec, J., & Potts, C
(2013) A computational approach to politeness with application to social factors. In Proceedings of ACL . Sofia, Bulgaria: ACL.
Ditta, A., & Steyvers, M
(2013) Collaborative memory in a serial combination procedure. Memory, 211, 668–674. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fellbaum, C
(1998) WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, P
(1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, T., & Steyvers, M
(2004) Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1011, 5228–5235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hacker, S., & von Ahn, L
(2009) Matchin: Eliciting user preferences with an online game. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1207–1216). Boston, MA: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI logo
Hardisty, E., Boyd-Graber, J., & Resnik, P
(2010) Modeling perspective using adaptor grammars. In Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 284–292). Boston, MA: ACL-EMNLP.
Keshtkar, F., & Inkpen, D
(2009) Using sentiment orientation features for mood classification in blogs. In Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Engineerings (pp. 24–29). Dalian, China: IEEE. DOI logo
Krishnapuram, B., Figueiredo, M., Carin, L., & Hartemink, A
(2005) Sparse multinomial logistic regression: Fast algorithms and generalization bounds. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 271, 957–968. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kruger, J., Epley, N., Parker, J., & Ng, Z.-W
(2005) Egocentrism over e-mail: Can we communicate as well as we think? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(6), 925–936. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Law, E., & von Ahn, L
(2009) Input-agreement: A new mechanism for collecting data using human computation games. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1197–1206). Boston, MA: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI logo
Lee, M., Steyvers, M., de Young, M., & Miller, B
(2012) Inferring expertise in knowledge and prediction ranking tasks. Topics in Cognitive Science, 41, 151–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, W., Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., & Hauptmann, A
(2006) Which side are you on? Identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels. In Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) . New York: CoNLL. DOI logo
McPartland, J., & Klin, A
(2006) Asperger’s syndrome. Adolescent Medicine Clinics, 171(3), 771–88.Google Scholar
Mihalcea, R., & Strapparava, C
(2009) The lie detector: Explorations in the automatic recognition of deceptive language. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics . Singapore: ACL. DOI logo
Mishne, G
(2005) Experiments with mood classification in blog posts. In Proceedings of SIGIR 2005 . Salvador, Brazil: ACM.
Mohammed, S
(2012) Portable features for classifying emotional text. In Proceedings of 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (pp. 587–591). Montreal, Canada: NAACLHLY.
Neviarouskaya, A., Prendinger, H., & Ishizuka, M
(2010) Recognition of affect, judgment, and appreciation in text. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2010) (pp. 806–814). Beijing China: COLING.
Pearl, L., & Steyvers, M
(2010) Identifying emotions, intentions, & attitudes in text using a game with a purpose. In Proceedings of NAACL-HLT 2010 Workshop on Computational Approaches to Analysis and Generation of Emotion in Text . Los Angeles, CA: NAACL.
(2012) Detecting authorship deception: A supervised machine learning approach using author writeprints. Literary and Linguistic Computings, 27(2), 183–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) “C’mon – You should read this”: Automatic identification of tone from language text. International Journal of Computational Linguistics, 4(1), 12–30.Google Scholar
Pennebaker, J., Booth, W., & Francis, M
(2007) Linguistic inquiry and word count: Liwc. Austin, TX: LIWC.net. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Princeton-University
(2010) About WordNet. http://​wordnet​.princeton​.edu.
Rosch, E
(1978) Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorizatio. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Rubin, V.L., & Conroy, N.J
(2011) Challenges in automated deception detection in computer-mediated communication. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strapparava, C., & Mihalcea, R
(2008) Learning to identify emotions in text. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (pp. 1556–1560). Fortaleza, Brazil: ACM.
Strapparava, C., & Valitutti, A
(2004) WordNetAffect: An affective extension of WordNet. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (pp. 1083–1086). Lisbon, Portugal: LREC.
Toutanova, K., Klein, D., Manning, C., & Singer, Y
(2003) Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network. In Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003 (pp. 252–259). Edmonton, Canada: HLT-NAACL. DOI logo
von Ahn, L
(2006) Games with a purpose. IEEE Computer Magazine, June1, 96–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
von Ahn, L., & Dabbish, L
(2004) Labeling images with a computer game. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 219–326). Vienna, ­Austria: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI logo
von Ahn, L., Kedia, M., & Blum, M
(2006) Verbosity: A game for collecting common-sense facts. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 75–78). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI logo
von Ahn, L., Liu, R., & Blum, M
(2006) Peekaboom: A game for locating objects in images. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 55–64). New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery. DOI logo
Warriner, A.B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M
(2013) Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1191–1207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yi, S., Steyvers, M., & Lee, M
(2012) The wisdom of crowds in combinatorial problems. Cognitive Science, 36(3), 452–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Vogler, Nikolai & Lisa Pearl
2020. Using linguistically defined specific details to detect deception across domains. Natural Language Engineering 26:3 ► pp. 349 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 january 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.