基于语言或评分量表的情绪分类:对语言和亚历山大症的计算分析。

Sverker Sikström, Miriam Nicolai, Josephine Ahrendt, Suvi Nevanlinna, Lotta Stille
{"title":"基于语言或评分量表的情绪分类:对语言和亚历山大症的计算分析。","authors":"Sverker Sikström, Miriam Nicolai, Josephine Ahrendt, Suvi Nevanlinna, Lotta Stille","doi":"10.1038/s44184-024-00080-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Rating scales are the dominating tool for the quantitative assessment of mental health. They are often believed to have a higher validity than language-based responses, which are the natural way of communicating mental states. Furthermore, it is unclear how difficulties articulating emotions—alexithymia—affect the accuracy of language-based communication of emotions. We investigated whether narratives describing emotional states are more accurately classified by questions-based computational analysis of language (QCLA) compared to commonly used rating scales. Additionally, we examined how this is affected by alexithymia. In Phase 1, participants (N = 348) generated narratives describing events related to depression, anxiety, satisfaction, and harmony. In Phase 2, another set of participants summarized the emotions described in the narratives of Phase 1 in five descriptive words and rating scales (PHQ-9, GAD-7, SWLS, and HILS). The words were quantified with a natural language processing model (i.e., LSA) and classified with machine learning (i.e., multinomial regression). The results showed that the language-based responses can be more accurate in classifying the emotional states compared to the rating scales. The degree of alexithymia did not influence the correctness of classification based on words or rating scales, suggesting that QCLA is not sensitive to alexithymia. However, narratives generated by people with high alexithymia were more difficult to classify than those generated by people with low alexithymia. These results suggest that the assessment of mental health may be improved by language-based responses analyzed by computational methods compared to currently used rating scales.","PeriodicalId":74321,"journal":{"name":"Npj mental health research","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11291691/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Language or rating scales based classifications of emotions: computational analysis of language and alexithymia\",\"authors\":\"Sverker Sikström, Miriam Nicolai, Josephine Ahrendt, Suvi Nevanlinna, Lotta Stille\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s44184-024-00080-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Rating scales are the dominating tool for the quantitative assessment of mental health. They are often believed to have a higher validity than language-based responses, which are the natural way of communicating mental states. Furthermore, it is unclear how difficulties articulating emotions—alexithymia—affect the accuracy of language-based communication of emotions. We investigated whether narratives describing emotional states are more accurately classified by questions-based computational analysis of language (QCLA) compared to commonly used rating scales. Additionally, we examined how this is affected by alexithymia. In Phase 1, participants (N = 348) generated narratives describing events related to depression, anxiety, satisfaction, and harmony. In Phase 2, another set of participants summarized the emotions described in the narratives of Phase 1 in five descriptive words and rating scales (PHQ-9, GAD-7, SWLS, and HILS). The words were quantified with a natural language processing model (i.e., LSA) and classified with machine learning (i.e., multinomial regression). The results showed that the language-based responses can be more accurate in classifying the emotional states compared to the rating scales. The degree of alexithymia did not influence the correctness of classification based on words or rating scales, suggesting that QCLA is not sensitive to alexithymia. However, narratives generated by people with high alexithymia were more difficult to classify than those generated by people with low alexithymia. These results suggest that the assessment of mental health may be improved by language-based responses analyzed by computational methods compared to currently used rating scales.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Npj mental health research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11291691/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Npj mental health research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44184-024-00080-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Npj mental health research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44184-024-00080-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

评分量表是心理健康定量评估的主要工具。人们通常认为,评分量表的有效性要高于以语言为基础的反应,因为语言是交流心理状态的自然方式。此外,目前还不清楚表达情绪的困难--反思症--如何影响基于语言的情绪交流的准确性。与常用的评分量表相比,我们研究了基于问题的语言计算分析(QCLA)是否能更准确地对描述情绪状态的叙述进行分类。此外,我们还研究了这一点如何受到亚历山大症的影响。在第一阶段,参与者(N = 348)生成了描述与抑郁、焦虑、满意和和谐相关事件的叙述。在第二阶段,另一组参与者用五个描述性词汇和评分量表(PHQ-9、GAD-7、SWLS 和 HILS)总结了第一阶段叙述中描述的情绪。这些词语通过自然语言处理模型(即 LSA)进行量化,并通过机器学习(即多项式回归)进行分类。结果表明,与评分量表相比,基于语言的反应能更准确地对情绪状态进行分类。失忆症的程度并不影响基于语言或评分量表的分类的正确性,这表明 QCLA 对失忆症并不敏感。然而,高条件反射患者的叙述比低条件反射患者的叙述更难分类。这些结果表明,与目前使用的评分量表相比,通过计算方法分析基于语言的反应可能会改善心理健康评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Language or rating scales based classifications of emotions: computational analysis of language and alexithymia

Language or rating scales based classifications of emotions: computational analysis of language and alexithymia
Rating scales are the dominating tool for the quantitative assessment of mental health. They are often believed to have a higher validity than language-based responses, which are the natural way of communicating mental states. Furthermore, it is unclear how difficulties articulating emotions—alexithymia—affect the accuracy of language-based communication of emotions. We investigated whether narratives describing emotional states are more accurately classified by questions-based computational analysis of language (QCLA) compared to commonly used rating scales. Additionally, we examined how this is affected by alexithymia. In Phase 1, participants (N = 348) generated narratives describing events related to depression, anxiety, satisfaction, and harmony. In Phase 2, another set of participants summarized the emotions described in the narratives of Phase 1 in five descriptive words and rating scales (PHQ-9, GAD-7, SWLS, and HILS). The words were quantified with a natural language processing model (i.e., LSA) and classified with machine learning (i.e., multinomial regression). The results showed that the language-based responses can be more accurate in classifying the emotional states compared to the rating scales. The degree of alexithymia did not influence the correctness of classification based on words or rating scales, suggesting that QCLA is not sensitive to alexithymia. However, narratives generated by people with high alexithymia were more difficult to classify than those generated by people with low alexithymia. These results suggest that the assessment of mental health may be improved by language-based responses analyzed by computational methods compared to currently used rating scales.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信