skip to main content
research-article

Comparing global news sentiment using hesitant linguistic terms

Published: 28 February 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Global policy makers need to maintain a pulse on the state of play of global governance. Advances in analytical tools, such as global news dashboards, can provide current information on changes to global sentiment. In particular, identifying unexpected shifts in sentiment following a major news event may better inform stakeholders’ actions. This paper defines a methodology to evaluate global sentiment for periods before, during, and after a major event. Each period's sentiment can be derived from news articles generated by news outlets. The sentiment is expressed in terms of hesitant linguistic terms to capture the range of sentiments articulated in each article. This representation is advantageous as it permits the interpretation of sentiments without conversion to numerical values. Sentiment from each article considered is aggregated into three centralized sentiments representing periods before, during, and after a particular event. This leads to a second enhancement to existing methods where the concept of a central opinion is represented in hesitant linguistic terms. Each of these sentiments is associated with a measure of consensus indicating the degree of agreement among the articles within their corresponding periods. A real case is presented for a noteworthy event in recent history. Three thousand three hundred fifty‐two articles that referenced both the World Health Organization and President Trump during the 2‐week period surrounding the event are analyzed. The results show that the methodology presented can detect changes in aggregated sentiment and consensus. When compared with means of aggregation based on crisp approaches, our model is more sensitive to shifts in sentiment. This type of information can better inform policy makers about public opinion as it not only detects shifts in sentiment but also discourses among citizens.

References

[1]
Gunter B, Koteyko N, Atanasova D. Sentiment analysis: a market‐relevant and reliable measure of public feeling? Int J Mark Res. 2014;56(2):231‐247.
[2]
Wang Y, Fikis DJ. Common core state standards on Twitter: public sentiment and opinion leaders. Educ Policy. 2019;33(4):650‐683.
[3]
Dahal B, Kumar SA, Li Z. Topic modeling and sentiment analysis of global climate change tweets. Soc Network Anal Min. 2019;9(1):24.
[4]
Chakraborty P, Sharma A. Public opinion analysis of the transportation policy using social media data: a case study on the Delhi odd–even policy. Transp Dev Econ. 2019;5(1):5.
[5]
Amina B, Azim T. SCANCPECLENS: a framework for automatic lexicon generation and sentiment analysis of micro blogging data on China Pakistan economic corridor. IEEE Access. 2019;7:133876‐133887.
[6]
Zhang D, Qiang M, Jiang H, Wen Q, An N, Xia B. Social sensing system for water conservation project: a case study of the South‐to‐North Water Transfer Project in China. Water Policy. 2018;20(4):667‐691.
[7]
Gerbner G, Marvanyi G. The many worlds of the world's press. J Commun. 1977;27(1):52‐66.
[8]
McCombs ME, Shaw DL. The agenda‐setting function of mass media. Publ Opinion Q. 1972;36(2):176‐187.
[9]
Cain‐Arzu DL. Sensationalism in Newspapers: a Look at the Reporter and Amandala in Belize 2010–2014. Rochester Institute of Technology; 2016.
[10]
Vinodhini G, Chandrasekaran R. Sentiment analysis and opinion mining: a survey. Int J. 2012;2(6):282‐292.
[11]
Neelakandan S, Paulraj D. A gradient boosted decision tree‐based sentiment classification of Twitter data. Int J Wavelets Multiresolution Inf Process. 2020;18(04):2050027.
[12]
Neelakandan S, Paulraj D. An automated learning model of conventional neural network based sentiment analysis on Twitter data. J Comput Theor Nanosci. 2020;17(5):2230‐2236.
[13]
Corea F. Can Twitter proxy the investors' sentiment? The case for the technology sector. Big Data Res. 2016;4:70‐74.
[14]
Kolagani SHD, Negahban A, Witt C. Identifying trending sentiments in the 2016 US presidential election: a case study of Twitter analytics. Issues Inf Syst. 2017;18(2):80‐86.
[15]
Yaqub U, Chun SA, Atluri V, Vaidya J. Sentiment based analysis of tweets during the US presidential elections. In: Hinnant CC, Ojo A, eds. Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research; 2017:1‐10.
[16]
Giachanou A, Crestani F. Tracking sentiment by time series analysis. In: Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval; 2016:1037‐1040.
[17]
Adams‐Cohen NJ. Policy change and public opinion: measuring shifting political sentiment with social media data. Am Politics Res. 2020;48(5):612‐621.
[18]
Prabowo R, Thelwall M. Sentiment analysis: a combined approach. J Inf. 2009;3(2):143‐157.
[19]
Cao N, Lu L, Lin YR, Wang F, Wen Z. Socialhelix: visual analysis of sentiment divergence in social media. J Visualization. 2015;18(2):221‐235.
[20]
Fan ZP, Li GM, Liu Y. Processes and methods of information fusion for ranking products based on online reviews: an overview. Inf Fusion. 2020;602:87‐97.
[21]
Fu X, Ouyang T, Yang Z, Liu S. A product ranking method combining the features–opinion pairs mining and interval‐valued Pythagorean fuzzy sets. Appl Soft Comput. 2020;973:106803.
[22]
Serrano‐Guerrero J, Romero FP, Olivas JA. Ordered weighted averaging for emotion‐driven polarity detection. Cognit Comput. 2021:1‐18.
[23]
Liu Y, Bi JW, Fan ZP. Ranking products through online reviews: a method based on sentiment analysis technique and intuitionistic fuzzy set theory. Inf Fusion. 2017;36:149‐161.
[24]
Liu Y, Bi JW, Fan ZP. A method for ranking products through online reviews based on sentiment classification and interval‐valued intuitionistic fuzzy TOPSIS. Int J Inf Technol Decision Making. 2017;16(06):1497‐1522.
[25]
Gkoumas D, Li Q, Lioma C, Yu Y, Song D. What makes the difference? An empirical comparison of fusion strategies for multimodal language analysis. Inf Fusion. 2021;66:184‐197.
[26]
Serrano‐Guerrero J, Romero FP, Olivas JA. Fuzzy logic applied to opinion mining: a review. Knowl‐Based Syst. 2021;222:107018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2021.107018
[27]
Appel O, Chiclana F, Carter J, Fujita H. A consensus approach to the sentiment analysis problem driven by support‐based IOWA majority. Int J Intell Syst. 2017;32(9):947‐965.
[28]
Appel O, Chiclana F, Carter J, Fujita H. Cross‐ratio uninorms as an effective aggregation mechanism in sentiment analysis. Knowl‐Based Syst. 2017;124:16‐22.
[29]
Rodriguez RM, Martinez L, Herrera F. Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. 2011;20(1):109‐119.
[30]
Montserrat‐Adell J, Agell N, Sánchez M, Ruiz FJ. Consensus, dissension and precision in group decision making by means of an algebraic extension of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Inf Fusion. 2018;42:1‐11.
[31]
Montserrat‐Adell J, Agell N, Sánchez M, Prats F, Ruiz FJ. Modeling group assessments by means of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. J Appl Logic. 2017;23:40‐50.
[32]
Montserrat‐Adell J, Agell N, Sánchez M, Ruiz FJ. A Representative in Group Decision by Means of the Extended Set of Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Term Sets. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016:56‐67.
[33]
Ruiz FJ, Angulo C, Agell N. IDD: a supervised interval distance‐based method for discretization. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2008;20(9):1230‐1238.
[34]
Garcia S, Luengo J, Sáez JA, Lopez V, Herrera F. A survey of discretization techniques: taxonomy and empirical analysis in supervised learning. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 2012;25(4):734‐750.
[35]
Leetaru K, Schrodt PA. GDELT: global data on events, location, and tone, 1979–2012. In: ISA Annual Convention. Vol 2. Citeseer; 2013:1‐49.
[36]
Kwak H, An J. A first look at global news coverage of disasters by using the GDELT dataset. In: Aiello LM, McFarland D, eds. International Conference on Social Informatics. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2014:300‐308.
[37]
Yonamine JE. A nuanced study of political conflict using the global datasets of events location and tone (GDELT) dataset. The Pennsylvania State University; 2013.
[38]
Galla D, Burke J. Predicting social unrest using GDELT. In: Tawfik NS, Spruit MR, eds. International Conference on Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2018:103‐116.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image International Journal of Intelligent Systems
International Journal of Intelligent Systems  Volume 37, Issue 4
April 2022
254 pages
ISSN:0884-8173
DOI:10.1002/int.v37.4
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

United Kingdom

Publication History

Published: 28 February 2022

Author Tags

  1. consensus measurement
  2. global policy
  3. hesitant linguistic terms
  4. sentiment analysis

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 04 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media