Novel Text Analysis for Investigating Personality: Identifying the Dark Lady in Shakespeare’s Sonnets

References

• Argamon, S., Koppel, M., Fine, J., & Shimoni, A. R. (2003). Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text, 23, August 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Argamon, S., Koppel, M., Pennebaker, J. W., & Schler, J. (2009). Automatically profiling the author of an anonymous text. Communications of the ACM, 52, 119–123.10.1145/1461928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, I. (2010). Rethinking Shakespeare’s dark lady. In M. Schoenfelt (Ed.), A Companion to Shakespeare's Sonnets (pp. 293–313). London: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Bermingham, A., Conway, M., McInerney, L., O’Hare, N., & Smeaton, A. F. (2009, July). Combining social network analysis and sentiment analysis to explore the potential for online radicalisation. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 2009. ASONAM’09. International Conference on Advances, IEEE, 231–236.
   Google Scholar
• Brynielsson, J., Horndahl, A., Johansson, F., Kaati, L., Mårtenson, C., & Svenson, P. (2013). Harvesting and analysis of weak signals for detecting lone wolf terrorists. Security Informatics, 2(1), 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Bucci, W. (2002). The referential process, consciousness, and the sense of self. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 22, 766–793.10.1080/07351692209349017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucci, W., & Kabasakalian-McKay, R. (2004). Scoring referential activity: Instructions for use with transcripts of spoken texts. In E. A. Graham (Ed.), (pp. 24). Garden City, NY: Derner Institute Adelphi University. October 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Bucci, W., & Maskit, B. (2005). Building a weighted dictionary for referential activity. In J. G. Shanahan, Y. Qu, & J. Wiebe (Eds.), Computing attitude and effect in text: Theory and applications (Vol. 20, pp. 49–60). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Buchta, C., Hornik, K., & Hahsler, M. (2008). Getting things in order: An introduction to the R package seriation. Journal of Statistical Software, 25, 1–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burnham, M. (1990). Dark lady and fair man: The love triangle in Shakespeare’s sonnets and ulysses. Studies in the Novel, 22, 43–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, N., Chandramouli, R., & Subbalakshmi, K. P. (2011). Author gender identification from text. Digital Investigation, 8, 78–88.10.1016/j.diin.2011.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coltheart, M. (1981). MRC Psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.10.1080/14640748108400805
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crosman, R. (1990). Making love out of nothing at all: The issue of story in Shakespeare's procreation sonnets. Shakespeare Quarterly, 41, 470–488.10.2307/2870777
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Dantzig, S., Cowell, R. A., Zeelenberg, R., & Pecher, D. (2011). A sharp image or a sharp knife: norms for the modality-exclusivity of 774 concept-property items. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 145–154.10.3758/s13428-010-0038-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan-Jones, K. (1983). Was the 1609 Shake-Speares sonnets really unauthorized? Review of English Studies, 34, 151–171.10.1093/res/XXXIV.134.151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrow, J. M. (1993) The collected works of Shakespeare. Retrieved from http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~matty/Shakespeare/
   Google Scholar
• Fernandino, L., Binder, J. R., Desai, R. H., Pendl, S. L., Humphries, C. J., Gross, W. L., ... & Seidenberg, M. S. (2015). Concept representation reflects multimodal abstraction: A framework for embodied semantics. Cerebral Cortex, 26, 2018–2034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fort, J. A. (1933). The order and chronology of Shakespeare's sonnets. Review of English Studies, 9, 19–23.10.1093/res/os-IX.33.19
   Google Scholar
• Ghajar-Khosravi, S., Kwantes, P., Derbentseva, N., & Huey, L. (2016). Quantifying salient concepts discussed in social media content: A case study using Twitter content written by radicalized youth. Journal of Terrorism Research, 7, 79–90.
   Google Scholar
• Horobin, S. (2010). Studying the history of early English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-04051-0
   Google Scholar
• Iqbal, F., Binsalleeh, H., Fung, B., & Debbabi, M. (2013). A unified data mining solution for authorship analysis in anonymous textual communications. Information Sciences, 231, 98–112.10.1016/j.ins.2011.03.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, M. P. (2005). Francis Meres and the cultural contexts of Shakespeare’s Rival poet sonnets. The Review of English Studies, 56, 224–246.10.1093/res/hgi050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juola, P., & Mikros, G. K. (2016). Cross-linguistic stylometric features: A preliminary investigation. International Conference on Statistical Analysis of Textual Data, Nice, France.
   Google Scholar
• Kambasković-Sawers, D. (2007). Three themes in one, which wondrous scope affords: Ambiguous Speaker and Storytelling in Shakespeare’s sonnets. Criticism, 49, 285–305.
   Google Scholar
• Kambourakis, G. (2014). Anonymity and closely related terms in the cyberspace: An analysis by example. Journal of Information Security and Applications, 19, 2–17.
   Google Scholar
• Kaminski, M. E. (2013). Real masks and real name policies: Applying anti-mask case law to anonymous online speech. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal, 23, 815–828.
   Google Scholar
• Kernot, D. (2013). The identification of authors using cross-document co-referencing. Retrieved from http://www.unsworks.unsw.edu.au/primo_library/libweb/action/dlDisplay.do?vid=UNSWORKS&docId=unsworks_12072
   Google Scholar
• Kernot, D. (2016). Can three pronouns discriminate identity in writing. In R. Sarker, H. Abbas, S. Dunstall, P. Kilby, R. Davis, & L. Young (Eds.), Data and decision sciences in action: Proceedings of the Australian society for operations research conference 2016, Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kernot, D., Bossomaier, T., & Bradbury, R. (2016). Shakespeare’s Sotto Voce to determine true identity from text. ( submitted).
   Google Scholar
• Kimura, D., & Tanaka-Ishii, K. (2014). Study on constants of natural language texts. Information and Media Technologies, 9, 771–789.
   Google Scholar
• Kubát, M., & Milička, J. (2013). Vocabulary richness measure in genres. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 20, 339–349.10.1080/09296174.2013.830552
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamb, A., Paul, M. J., & Dredze, M. (2013, June). Separating fact from fear: Tracking Flu infections on Twitter. HLT-NAACL, Atlanta, GA, 789–795.
   Google Scholar
• Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22, 557.10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liiv, I. (2010). Seriation and matrix reordering methods: An historical overview. Statistical analysis and data mining, 3, 70–91.
   Google Scholar
• Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2009). Modality exclusivity norms for 423 object properties. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 558–564.10.3758/BRM.41.2.558
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mair, D. (2016). # Westgate: A case study: How Al-Shabaab used Twitter during an ongoing attack. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 40, 24–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsuo, Y., & Ishizuka, M. (2004). Keyword extraction from a single document using word co-occurrence statistical information. International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 13, 157–169.10.1142/S0218213004001466
   Google Scholar
• Matz, R. (2007). The world of Shakespeare’s sonnets: An introduction. London: McFarland and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Menhinick, E. F. (1964). A comparison of some species-individuals diversity indices applied to samples of field insects. Ecology, 45, 859–861.10.2307/1934933
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A. (1995). The science of words. New York, NY: Scientific American Library.
   Google Scholar
• Northoff, G., Heinzel, A., de Greck, M., Bermpohl, F., Dobrowolny, H., & Panksepp, J. (2006). Self-referential processing in our brain—A meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self. NeuroImage, 31, 440–457.10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W. (2011). The secret life of pronouns. New Scientist, 211, 42–45.10.1016/S0262-4079(11)62167-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popescu, V. (2014). The many faces of love: A (re) reading of Shakespeare’s sonnets four centuries later. Communication, Context, Interdisciplinarity, 3, 281–290.
   Google Scholar
• Rickards, B. (2014, January). Sonnets of Shakespeare by William Shakespeare. Hackensack, NJ: Encyclopedia of Literature, Salem Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenstein, M., Foltz, P. W., DeLisi, L. E., & Elvevåg, B. (2015). Language as a biomarker in those at high-risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Research, 165, 249–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simonto, D. K. (1989). Shakespeare’s sonnets: A case of and for single-case historiometry. Journal of Personality, 57, 695–721.10.1111/jopy.1989.57.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahel, W., & Maechler, M. (2011). ‘Jitter’ (Add Noise) to numbers. R Documentation (1995 – 2011). Retrieved August 2, 2016, from http://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/base/html/jitter.html
   Google Scholar
• Stapleton, M. L. (1993). “My false eyes”: The dark lady and self-knowledge. Studies in Philology, 90, 213–230. Page 224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Surette, R. (2016). Performance crime and justice. Current Issues Criminal Justice, 27, 195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanaka-Ishii, K., & Aihara, S. (2015). Computational constancy measures of texts – Yule’s K and Rényi’s Entropy. Computational Linguistics, 41, 539–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toutanova, K., & Manning, C. D. (2000, October). Enriching the knowledge sources used in a maximum entropy part-of-speech tagger. Proceedings of the 2000 Joint SIGDAT conference on Empirical methods in natural language processing and very large corpora: held in conjunction with the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics-Volume 13, Association for Computational Linguistics, 63–70.
   Google Scholar
• Tweedie, F. J., & Baayen, R. H. (1998). How variable may a constant be? Measures of lexical Richness in perspective. Computers and the Humanities, 32, 323–352.10.1023/A:1001749303137
   Google Scholar
• Van Gijsel, S., Speelman, D., & Geeraerts, D. (2005). A variationist, corpus linguistic analysis of lexical richness. Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2005, Birmingham, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Vermeer, A. (2000). Coming to grips with lexical richness in spontaneous speech data. Language Testing, 17, 65–83.10.1191/026553200676636328
   Google Scholar
• Wright, S., Denney, D., Pinkerton, A., Jansen, V., & Bryden, J. (2016). Resurgent insurgents: Quantitative research into Jihadists who get suspended but return on Twitter. Journal of Terrorism Research, 7.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, C. C., & Ng, T. D. (2007, May). Terrorism and crime related weblog social network: Link, content analysis and information visualization. Intelligence and Security Informatics, 2007 IEEE, IEEE, 55–58.
   Google Scholar
• Zabelina, D. L., O’Leary, D., Pornpattananangkul, N., Nusslock, R., & Beeman, M. (2015). Creativity and sensory gating indexed by the P50: Selective versus leaky sensory gating in divergent thinkers and creative achievers. Neuropsychologia, 69, 77–84.10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.01.034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar