Text analysis as a tool for analyzing conversation in online support groups

ABSTRACT

In this paper we describe a software tool that allows investigators to make comparisons across different online forums and media by analyzing word counts in user-specified categories. Using a large sample of messages from a bipolar support chatroom, we demonstrate how this tool can be used to characterize the nature of the discourse and compare it to other media, to analyze relationships among different word categories, and to characterize changes in visitors' discourse over time. Future plans for adding functionality to the software and using external data for additional validation are also discussed.

REFERENCES

• 1: Brennan, P. F., & Ripich, S. (1994). Use of a home-care computer network by persons with AIDS. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 10, 258--272.
• 2: Lynn Cherny, Conversation and Community: Chat in a Virtual World, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, 1999
• 3: Epstein, Y. M., Rosenberg, H. S., Grant, T., & Hemenway, N. (2002). Use of the internet as the only outlet for talking about infertility. Fertility and Sterility, 78, 507--514.
• 4: Fussell, S. R., & Moss, M. M. (1998). Figurative language in descriptions of emotional states. In S. R. Fussell & R. J. Kreuz (Eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• 5: Fussell, S. R., & Setlock, L. D. (under review). Informal communication in an online volunteer community: Implications for supporting virtual relationships.
• 6: Galegher, J., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1998). Legitimacy, authority, and community in electronic support groups. Written Communication, 15, 493--530.
• 7: Herring, S. C. (2001). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin, & H. Hamilton, Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 612--634). Oxford: Blackwell.
• 8: Kraut, R. E., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukhopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017--1032.
• 9: Pennebaker, J.W., & Francis, M.E. (2001). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC {software program for text analysis}. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• 10: Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology.
• 11: Person, B. (2002). Online support for caregivers of people with a mental illness. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 26, 70--77
• 12: Stirman, S. W., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2001). Word use in the poetry of suicidal and non-suicidal poets. Psychosomatic Medicine, 63, 517--522
• 13: Stone, L. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Trauma in real time: Talking and avoiding online conversations about the death of Princess Diana. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 173--183.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces
          Subjects: Computer-supported cooperative work

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces
          Subjects: Evaluation/methodology; Synchronous interaction

Keywords:
computer-mediated communication, computer-supported cooperative work, conversational analysis, empirical studies, online communities