語言探索與字詞計算詞典2015中文版之修訂

林瑋芳; 黃金蘭; 林以正; 李嘉玲; James W. Pennebaker

doi:10.7014/SRMA.2020100004

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P73 - 118

社会科学 > 社会科学综合

DOI： 10.7014/SRMA

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

语言探索与字词计算词典2015中文版之修订

The Revision of the Chinese Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count Dictionary 2015

林玮芳(Wei-Fang Lin) ；黄金兰(Chin-Lan Huang) ；林以正(Yi-Cheng Lin) ；李嘉玲(Chia-Ling Lee) ； James W. Pennebaker

调查研究-方法与应用； 45 期 (2020 / 10 / 01) ， P73 - 118

繁体中文 DOI： 10.7014/SRMA.2020100004

语文探索与字词计算；文本分析；大数据应用； LIWC (Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count) ； text analysis ； big data analytics

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (57) │ 被引用文献 (6) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

Automated analysis of natural language in its daily use has shown to be effective in capturing psychological characteristics in the literature. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC), developed by Pennebaker and his research team, is one of the most commonly used text analysis tools in the social sciences. The essential assumption of LIWC is that the frequencies of word usage in certain categories serve as language markers that index individuals' inner thoughts and psychological processes. LIWC contains two parts, the computer software and the dictionary. The computer software is used to calculate the frequency of words in each category. The dictionary is the LIWC key classifying words into categories. LIWC2015 is the latest dictionary, and is based on a significant revision of its predecessor, the LIWC2007 dictionary. The aim of the current study is to develop a corresponding Chinese version of the LIWC2015 dictionary (CLIWC2015) and demonstrate its reliability and validity. Based on the Chinese LIWC 2007 dictionary, we revised CLIWC2015 by adding and deleting corresponding categories of the LIWC2015 dictionary. We described the details of the process in Study 1. There is a total of 10,795 words belonging to 79 categories in CLIWC2015, including 25 linguistic process categories and 54 psychological process categories. Study 2 collected 100 texts from blog posts on various topics. The average total word count in each post was 1,290 in Study 2. To calculate the reliability, sentences in each text were ordered first, and then odd- and even-numbered sentences were grouped into two subtexts. LIWC indices were calculated for each subtext, and then correlation coefficients between the corresponding subtexts for each language category were used for reliability analyses. Results showed that all word categories demonstrated strong correlation effects except one punctuation category which calculated the frequency of the dashes usage. One possible explanation is that dashes is not a commonly used punctuation mark in the blog posts which could have lowered the reliability. To examine the validity, study 3 collected 100 posts from the Ptt bulletin board system, 50 of which were from the ＂hate＂ board, and the rest were from the ＂sad＂ board. The average total word count in each post was 164 in Study 3. The two sets' linguistic features were compared. Consistent with our hypotheses, ＂hate＂ board posts used significantly more anger, swear and netspeak words, and exclamation marks. In contrast, ＂sad＂ board posts used significantly more first-personal singular pronouns, sad, anxiety and cognitive words, and higher cognitive complexity words. Across studies 2 and 3, our findings supported the reliability and validity of the CLIWC2015 well. Unlike traditional content analysis, which requires a great deal of time and effort, one of the most important strengths of LIWC is the ability to analyze huge text files rapidly. Recently, more and more research has applied LIWC to analyze big data. In the last part of this article, we also discussed the implications of using CLIWC2015 and its applications in Chinese culture and big data analytics.

参考文献 ( 57 ) 〈TOP〉

林玮芳, Wei-Fang,黄金兰, Chin-Lan,林以正, Yi-Cheng(2015)。中庸与转念：以字词分析体现中庸思维之情绪调节动态历程。本土心理学研究，44，119-150。
连结：
金树人, Shuh-Ren(2010)。心理位移之结构特性及其辩证现象之分析：自我多重面向的叙写与叙说。中华辅导与谘商学报，28，187-228。
连结：
黄金兰, Chi-Lan,Chung, Cindy K.,Hui, Natalie,林以正, Yi-Cheng,谢亦泰, Yi-Tai,Lam, Ben C. P.,程威铨, Wei-Chuan,Bond, Michael H.,Pennebaker, James W.(2012)。中文版「语文探索与字词计算」词典之建立。中华心理学刊，54(2)，185-201。
连结：
黄金兰, Chin-Lan,张仁和, Jen-Ho,程威铨, Wei-Chuan,林以正, Yi-Cheng(2014)。我你他的转变：以字词分析探讨大学生心理位移书写文本之位格特性。中华辅导与谘商学报，39，35-58。
连结：
Cohn, Michael A.,Mehl, Matthias R.,Pennebaker, James W.(2004).Linguistic Markers of Psychological Change Surrounding September 11, 2001.Psychological Science,15,687-693.

被引用文献 ( 6 ) 〈TOP〉

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址