MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Weighted Lexicon-based Sentiment Analysis for Women Career Traits in Information Technology

2022· article· en· W4366724860 on OpenAlexafffund
Kaitlin De Chastelain Finnigan, Fahim Anzum, Jon Rokne, Marina L. Gavrilova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitute of Development and Economic Alternatives
KeywordsSadnessLexiconPsychologySentiment analysisAngerHappinessComputer scienceSocial psychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an unsupervised sentiment analysis model leveraging the Polarity Rank algorithm and sentence dependency graph is proposed to predict the sentiments of women in IT. The primary objective is to identify groups of individuals with common traits (community and job role) who had different sentiments, as well as explore the impact of Diversity Equity & Inclusion (DEI) programs on participants' career satisfaction. The model, based on a 7-point Likert scale, classified responses into Very Negative, Negative, Slightly Negative, Neutral, Slightly Positive, Positive, and Very Positive classes By delving into different demographics and different questions within the survey, it was found that DEI programs have a positive impact on career satisfaction as well as lessening the presence of Anger, Fear, and Sadness. Additionally, it was discovered that Anticipation was a dominant emotion in all responses. This paper provides a foundational look at the sentiments expressed by women in the IT industry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningFrench-language works237,207