The big two dictionaries: Capturing agency and communion in natural language

Pietraszkiewicz, Agnieszka; Formanowicz, Magdalena; Sendén, Marie Gustafsson; Boyd, Ryan L.; Sikström, Sverker; Sczesny, Sabine

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2561

Cited by 69 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results supported H1, and are consistent with a previous study [16] which reported that people expect tangible information about control issues of AVs and their safety. These results are also coherent with the notion that the communion and agency are distinctly expressed in natural language [79,132]. The objective of the second study was to confirm how the recipient's safety concerns (observer's perspective) as well as goal orientation (agent's perspective) with regard to AV is related to technology acceptance components in different technology presentation contexts (the agentic vs communal AV advertisement).…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…The objective of the second study was to confirm how the recipient's safety concerns (observer's perspective) as well as goal orientation (agent's perspective) with regard to AV is related to technology acceptance components in different technology presentation contexts (the agentic vs communal AV advertisement). First, the pilot study provided confirmation that communal and agentic content may be utilized to create a description of AV technology [79]. People not only perceive and distinguish these types of content in themselves and others, regardless of culture [133], but also when it comes to the AV technology context.…”

Section: Theoretical Contributionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The former contains such characteristics as: warm, nice, helpful, cooperative, and trustworthy (along with their opposites), while the latter embodies such characteristics as: efficient, competent, active, persevering, and energetic (with their opposites). These content dimensions are manifested in natural language [79], spontaneous self-representation [80], and information processing [81].…”

Section: Agency and Communionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How different autonomous vehicle presentation influences its acceptance: Is a communal car better than agentic one?

Hryniewicz

Grzegorczyk

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public acceptance of autonomous vehicles (AVs) is still questionable. Nevertheless, it can be influenced by proper communication strategy. Therefore, our research focuses on (1) the type of information concerning AVs that consumers seek and (2) how to communicate this technology in order to increase its acceptance. In the first study (N = 711) topic modeling showed that the most sought for information concern the communion and the agency of AVs. In the second, experimental study (N = 303) we measured the participants' fear and goal-orientation in relation to AVs. Then, after the manipulation of the AV advertisement (imbued with communal vs agentic content), technology acceptance components (perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and behavioral intention) were verified. The comparative analysis of the structural model estimates showed that the both participants' fear and goal-orientation in relation to AVs were associated much more with the acceptance components of the communal AV rather than the agentic one. Therefore, people want to know both whether AVs are communal and agentic, but they are more prone to accept a communal AV than agentic one.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Contributionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Section: Theoretical Contributionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Agency and Communionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How different autonomous vehicle presentation influences its acceptance: Is a communal car better than agentic one?

Hryniewicz

Grzegorczyk

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The procedure we used to develop and validate the PVD builds upon and advances procedures used in earlier approaches to extracting information on psychological constructs from text data, such as personality traits, moral foundations, or sentiments (Graham, Haidt, & Nosek, 2009; Pietraszkiewicz et al, 2018; Tausczik & Pennebaker, 2010). In the development stage, a group of experts agreed on a list of candidate words representing the 10 value types proposed by Schwartz (1992) (content validity).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Validation of the Personal Values Dictionary: A Theory–Driven Tool for Investigating References to Basic Human Values in Text

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimating psychological constructs from natural language has the potential to expand the reach and applicability of personality science. Research on the Big Five has produced methods to reliably assess personality traits from text, but the development of comparable tools for personal values is still in the early stages. Based on the Schwartz theory of basic human values, we developed a dictionary for the automatic assessment of references to personal values in text. To refine and validate the dictionary, we used Facebook updates, blog posts, essays, and book chapters authored by over 180 000 individuals. The results show high reliability for the dictionary and a pattern of correlations between the value types in line with the circumplex structure. We found small to moderate (rs = .1–.4) but consistent correlations between dictionary scores and self‐reported scores for 7 out of 10 values. Correlations between the dictionary scores and age, gender, and political orientation of the author and scores for other established dictionaries mostly followed theoretical predictions. The Personal Values Dictionary can be used to assess references to value orientations in textual data, such as tweets, blog posts, or status updates, and will stimulate further research in methods to assess human basic values from text.

show abstract

“…Finally, a recent study (Pietraszkiewicz, Formanowicz, Gustafsson Sendén, Boyd, Sikstrom, & Sczesny, 2018) developed dictionaries of communion (similar to warmth) and agency (similar to competence) using the LIWC development approach. In the supplement, we further discuss these dictionaries and how they compare to the subset of dictionaries developed here for these constructs.…”

Section: Illustration: Stereotype Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated Dictionary Creation for Analyzing Text: An Illustration from Stereotype Content

Nicolas¹,

X²,

Fiske³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent advances in natural language processing provide new approaches to analyze psychological open-ended data. However, many of these methods require translating to the needs of psychologists working with text. Here, we introduce automated methods to create and validate extensive dictionaries of psychological constructs using Wordnet and word embeddings. Specifically, we first expand an initial list of seed words by using Wordnet to obtain synonyms, antonyms, and other semantically related terms. Next, we evaluate dictionary reliability by using word embeddings trained on independent sources. Finally, we evaluate the dictionaries’ convergent validity against traditional scale ratings and human judgments. We illustrate these innovations by creating stereotype content dictionaries, a construct in social psychology that lacks specialized and validated dictionaries for coding open-ended data. These dictionaries achieved over 80% coverage of new responses, compared to 20% coverage by the seed-word-only approach. Cosine similarity with word embeddings confirmed that the dictionaries are more similar within the same concept than across concepts. Moreover, open-ended responses predicted both traditional scale ratings and human judgments about the dictionary topic. The R package Automated Dictionary Creation for Analyzing Text (ADCAT; https://github.com/gandalfnicolas/ADCAT) allows anyone to create novel dictionaries for constructs of interest and to access the stereotype content dictionaries.

show abstract

The big two dictionaries: Capturing agency and communion in natural language

Cited by 69 publications

References 76 publications

How different autonomous vehicle presentation influences its acceptance: Is a communal car better than agentic one?

How different autonomous vehicle presentation influences its acceptance: Is a communal car better than agentic one?

Development and Validation of the Personal Values Dictionary: A Theory–Driven Tool for Investigating References to Basic Human Values in Text

Automated Dictionary Creation for Analyzing Text: An Illustration from Stereotype Content

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About