Open-ended survey data constitute an important basis in research as well as for making business decisions. Collecting and manually analysing free-text survey data is generally more costly than collecting and analysing survey data consisting of answers to multiple-choice questions. Yet free-text data allow for new content to be expressed beyond predefined categories and are a very valuable source of new insights into people's opinions. At the same time, surveys always make ontological assumptions about the nature of the entities that are researched, and this has vital ethical consequences. Human interpretations and opinions can only be properly ascertained in their richness using textual data sources; if these sources are analyzed appropriately, the essential linguistic nature of humans and social entities is safeguarded. Natural Language Processing (NLP) offers possibilities for meeting this ethical business challenge by automating the analysis of natural language and thus allowing for insightful investigations of human judgements. We present a computational pipeline for analysing large amounts of responses to open-ended questions in surveys and extract keywords that appropriately represent people's opinions. This pipeline addresses the need to perform such tasks outside the scope of both commercial software and bespoke analysis, exceeds the performance to state-of-the-art systems, and performs this task in a transparent way that allows for scrutinising and exposing potential biases in the analysis. Following the principle of Open Data Science, our code is open-source and generalizable to other datasets.
The Internet facilitates large-scale collaborative projects and the emergence of Web 2.0 platforms, where producers and consumers of content unify, has drastically changed the information market. On the one hand, the promise of the "wisdom of the crowd" has inspired successful projects such as Wikipedia, which has become the primary source of crowd-based information in many languages. On the other hand, the decentralized and often un-monitored environment of such projects may make them susceptible to low quality content. In this work, we focus on Urban Dictionary, a crowd-sourced online dictionary. We combine computational methods with qualitative annotation and shed light on the overall features of Urban Dictionary in terms of growth, coverage and types of content. We measure a high presence of opinion-focused entries, as opposed to the meaning-focused entries that we expect from traditional dictionaries. Furthermore, Urban Dictionary covers many informal, unfamiliar words as well as proper nouns. Urban Dictionary also contains offensive content, but highly offensive content tends to receive lower scores through the dictionary's voting system. The low threshold to include new material in Urban Dictionary enables quick recording of new words and new meanings, but the resulting heterogeneous content can pose challenges in using Urban Dictionary as a source to study language innovation.
The present report summarizes an exploratory study which we carried out in the context of the COST Action IS1310 "Reassembling the Republic of Letters, 1500-1800", and which is relevant to the activities of Working Group 3 "Texts and Topics" and Working Group 2 "People and Networks". In this study we investigated the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Network Text Analysis on a small sample of seventeenth-century letters selected from Hartlib Papers, whose records are in one of the catalogues of Early Modern Letters Online (EMLO) and whose online edition is available on the website of the Humanities Research Institute at the University of Sheffield (http://www.hrionline.ac.uk/hartlib/). We outline the NLP pipeline used to automatically process the texts into a network representation, in order to identify the texts' "narrative centrality", i.e. the most central entities in the texts, and the relations between them.