| Literature DB >> 23189049 |
Emily B Falk1, Matthew Brook O'Donnell, Matthew D Lieberman.
Abstract
What happens in the mind of a person who first hears a potentially exciting idea?We examined the neural precursors of spreading ideas with enthusiasm, and dissected enthusiasm into component processes that can be identified through automated linguistic analysis, gestalt human ratings of combined linguistic and non-verbal cues, and points of convergence/divergence between the two. We combined tools from natural language processing (NLP) with data gathered using fMRI to link the neurocognitive mechanisms that are set in motion during initial exposure to ideas and subsequent behaviors of these message communicators outside of the scanner. Participants' neural activity was recorded as they reviewed ideas for potential television show pilots. Participants' language from video-taped interviews collected post-scan was transcribed and given to an automated linguistic sentiment analysis (SA) classifier, which returned ratings for evaluative language (evaluative vs. descriptive) and valence (positive vs. negative). Separately, human coders rated the enthusiasm with which participants transmitted each idea. More positive sentiment ratings by the automated classifier were associated with activation in neural regions including medial prefrontal cortex; MPFC, precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex; PC/PCC, and medial temporal lobe; MTL. More evaluative, positive, descriptions were associated exclusively with neural activity in temporal-parietal junction (TPJ). Finally, human ratings indicative of more enthusiastic sentiment were associated with activation across these regions (MPFC, PC/PCC, DMPFC, TPJ, and MTL) as well as in ventral striatum (VS), inferior parietal lobule and premotor cortex. Taken together, these data demonstrate novel links between neural activity during initial idea encoding and the enthusiasm with which the ideas are subsequently delivered. This research lays the groundwork to use machine learning and neuroimaging data to study word of mouth communication and the spread of ideas in both traditional and new media environments.Entities:
Keywords: fMRI; information diffusion; natural language processing; sentiment analysis; word-of-mouth
Year: 2012 PMID: 23189049 PMCID: PMC3506032 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00313
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Hum Neurosci ISSN: 1662-5161 Impact factor: 3.169
Figure 1Participant procedure and data analysis flow. Participants were exposed to an initial set of ideas while neural activity was monitored throughout their brains using fMRI. They were then videotaped discussing each idea. These videotapes were coded by humans, and transcripts of the language were separately given to an automated language classifier that performed a sentiment analysis.
Example normalized text (case and punctuation removed) with associated ratings by humans who had access to full voice and visual cues (scale = 0–100), automated positivity scores from the language classifier (scale = −1 to 1), and automated evaluative language scores from the language classifier (scale = 0–1).
| Higher evaluative/Lower descriptive | Beautyqueens | Beautyqueens |
| Beauty queens i thought looked pretty hilarious um it was about moms who were former beauty queens who raised their daughters to be beauty queens it was about the stress of um their the daughters trying to be beauty queens and it was also about the mothers a little too um and that actually looked really funny um so i would definitely recommend moving forward with that one | Beauty queens i don't know if its i am biased cause i am a guy but beauty queens would really not appeal to me that much cause the mere fact that i don't want to see a little girl putting hair and make up on for four hours go walking across the stage getting off the stage and doing it again two or three times and then losing or winning i really don't care um so that really doesn't appeal to me or jujust the moms pushing the kids jus they do that anyway why beauty | |
| human: 85 | human: 20.5 | |
| positivity: 0.49 | positivity: −0.80 | |
| evaluative: 0.99 | evaluative: 0.99 | |
| Bizarreworld | Bizarreworld | |
| Bizzare world is a proposal in which contestants would um would travel to a different country in every episode and they would have to survive in awkward in a bizarre different part of a country and it would just follow them in their show to survive and maintain in a very different environment i thought it was very interesting show because i think it's an interesting proposal because it would um attract a lot of audiences who are interested in um in knowing what there is different countries of the world and it's really interesting to see how people manage to survive so i would definitely recommend it | Um bizarre world uh i mean i have seen multiple shows like they and they wouldn't really appeal to me just you put uh people from different parts of the world into one location or dif different countries or something every week and then there is a challenge the one who performs the worst in that challenge is the one that's eliminated i mean just i i it wouldn't really appeal to me uh the one appealing factor would be that you would get to see different cultures from around the world the challenges and hohow thethey have to think on the spot | |
| human: 72 | human: 33.5 | |
| positivity: 0.42 | positivity: −0.75 | |
| evaluative: 0.95 | evaluative: 0.99 | |
| Nightlife | Nightlife | |
| Nightlife Night life is about um students i think living in other countries and they had to kind of just go through the trial of living in another country not knowing the language having to make money and support themselves um i think that would be an entertaining show um kind of like real world but in other countries so it would be entertaining i think people would really like to watch it especially it it’s just to see scenery in other countries cuz that’s always cool to see if you’ve never been there | Night life is a television show based on basically a party scene hence the title night life uh where they throw different people into different areas of the world and … and um they don't know the language they don't know the culture they don't have much money they have to get jobs um that would be an ok show i think it would make it although it would probably be a show that i would not watch | |
| human: 77 | human: 35 | |
| positivity: 0.4182 | positivity: −0.7862 | |
| evaluative: 0.9989 | evaluative: 0.7409 | |
| Lower evaluative/Higher descriptive | Beautyqueens | Bizarreworld |
| The next show is called beauty queens and this has to do with a bunch of moms that were beauty queens when they were young and it focuses on their daughters and how their daughters struggle with living up to their mothers expectations and like becoming beauty queens themselves and so some can live up to their mom's expectations and become beauty queens but some fail and it deals with the drama of this | hhh um the next one is called bizarre world and it's a um it's a reality show where they take starting with like ten contestants they take them to um to all these different locales where they have to um undergo challenges based on the culture and the environment they that they're in and that i guess who ever uh which ever contestant doesn't uh does the worst with these challenges is uh is eliminated its its kind of standard reality show fair | |
| human: 39.5 | human: 36.5 | |
| positivity: 0.41 | positivity: −0.56 | |
| evaluative: 0.01 | evaluative: 0.41 | |
| BizarreWorld | Roommates | |
| Um oh the next one is geared towards a more reality tv show called bizarre world and this is where there's a big group of contestants and each episode they are taken to a different new and bizarre place around the world and they are forced with challenges that have to do with the environment that they're placed in and obviously the ones who don't cope with the challenges are kicked off the show and those that um cope well continue until they're down to the final winner kind of like this show survivor now which is really popular so this could be popular as well | The next one is called roommates and it's um four girls that are randomly placed together and they go to college and become roommates and they each have a distinct personality it's kind of like the previous show called classes but geared to a more older group of watchers | |
| human: 78 | human: 76.5 | |
| positivity: 0.45 | positivity: −0.56 | |
| evaluative: 0.21 | evaluative: 0.04 | |
| Example where automated text rating is similar, but human coded scores differ, likely due to non-verbal cues | Nightlife | NightLife |
| um: night life was a show about the five people in the different country in the foreign country and sort of how they have to survive um: and make their own living: and deal with the changes in a different country | the next show is called night life and has to do with teenagers in foreign countries and they have to learn about the culture and um kind of their interactions and their night life | |
| human: 64.5 | human: 40 | |
| positivity: 0.48 | positivity: 0.47 | |
| evaluative: 0.00 | evaluative: 0.00 |
Human, human coded enthusiasm scores; positivity, automated sentiment analyzer rating of positivity (vs. negativity); evaluative, automated sentiment analyzer rating of evaluative (vs. objectivity).
Intraclass correlation coefficients representing the proportion of variance in each rating of interest that occurred between subjects (or between shows), compared to the total (between + within) variance.
| Human coders | 0.02 | 0.14 |
| Automated positivity | 0.18 | 0.13 |
| Automated evaluative | 0.23 | 0.18 |
| Positivity scaled by evaluative | 0.05 | 0.09 |
ICCs were calculated as [Tau / (Tau + SigmaSq)] using the mult.icc function from the multilevel package (Bliese, 2008) in R (R Development Core Team, 2011).
Figure 2Neural regions associated with the ways in which ideas were communicated after the scan. (A) Associations with positive sentiment, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer. (B) Associations with positive sentiment, scaled by evaluative, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer. (C) Associations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders. (D) Conjunction analysis of (A) (associations with positive sentiment, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer) and (C) (associations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders). (E) Conjunction analysis of (B) (associations with positive sentiment, scaled by evaluative, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer) and (C) (associations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders). Note: All analyses were conducted using a threshold of p < 0.005. Results in (A–C) employ a cluster extent threshold of k = 37, corresponding to p < 0.05, corrected for multiple comparisons. Results in (D) and (E) represent conjunctions of analyses cluster corrected in this manner. DMPFC, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex; MPFC, medial prefrontal cortex; PC/PCC, precuneus/posterior cingulate; TPJ, temporal parietal junction; VMPFC, ventral medial prefrontal cortex; VS, ventral striatum.
Positive correlations with positive sentiment, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer.
| Precuneus | −6 | −67 | 37 | 594 | 3.97 |
| Posterior cingulate | −6 | −47 | 31 | – | 5.12 |
| L cerebellum | −6 | −47 | −2 | – | 5.62 |
| MPFC | −2 | 56 | 10 | 208 | 4.02 |
| MPFC | −6 | 50 | 1 | – | 3.61 |
| ACC | 1 | 32 | 16 | – | 4.11 |
| MTL | −20 | −30 | −11 | 108 | 4.26 |
| MTL | −13 | −5 | −26 | – | 3.75 |
| DMPFC | −13 | 43 | 34 | 51 | 3.82 |
| R Cuneus | 11 | −84 | 19 | 45 | 3.63 |
| R cerebellum | 46 | −54 | −29 | 50 | 4.21 |
| Middle frontal gyrus | −26 | 67 | 22 | 45 | 3.9 |
Positive correlations with positive sentiment, scaled by evaluative, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer.
| TPJ | 49 | −60 | 40 | 78 | 3.68 |
| – | 42 | −71 | 37 | – | 4.61 |
Positive correlations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders.
| MPFC | 1 | 56 | 7 | 188 | 3.44 |
| VMPFC | −5 | 50 | −11 | – | 3.02 |
| Subgenual ACC | 4 | 29 | −8 | – | 4.42 |
| TPJ | 49 | −57 | 28 | 66 | 3.22 |
| IPL/Angular gyrus | 42 | −57 | 34 | – | 3.24 |
| TPJ/Angular gyrus | −47 | −64 | 31 | 99 | 2.97 |
| Superior parietal lobule/IPL | −30 | −71 | 46 | – | 4.43 |
| DMPFC | 11 | 39 | 43 | 194 | 3.5 |
| dPMC | 35 | 22 | 61 | – | 5.43 |
| DMPFC | −12 | 42 | 37 | 260 | 2.99 |
| dPMC | −16 | 32 | 58 | – | 5.31 |
| MTL/Parahippocampal gyrus | 18 | −23 | −20 | 64 | 5.25 |
Conjunction analysis of (a) positive correlations with positive sentiment, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer and (c) positive correlations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders.
| DMPFC | −13 | 43 | 37 | 12 |
| MPFC | −2 | 53 | 4 | 33 |
Human-coded enthusiasm, controlling SA rated positive × evaluative.
| MTL | −26 | −43 | −8 | 38 | 4.13 |
| IPL | −30 | −70 | 46 | 41 | 3.15 |
| dPMC | −9 | 18 | 64 | 73 | 3.59 |
Human-coded enthusiasm, controlling SA rated positive.
| dPMC | −23 | 22 | 52 | 178 | 4.37 |
| dPMC | 35 | 22 | 61 | 63 | 4.36 |
| IPL/superior parietal lobe | −26 | −74 | 52 | 64 | 3.65 |
| Parahippocampal gyrus | −16 | −9 | −32 | 74 | 3.99 |
| Middle cingulate | 8 | 1 | 28 | 41 | 3.89 |
Note: Results thresholded at p < 0.005, (whole brain: k = 37), corresponding to p < 0.05, corrected for multiple comparisons. ACC, anterior cingulate cortex; DMPFC, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex; MPFC, medial prefrontal cortex; MTL, medial temporal lobe; TPJ, temporal parietal junction; VMPFC, ventral medial prefrontal cortex; IPL, intraparietal lobule; dMPC, dorsal premotor cortex. Dashed lines (–) indicate continuation of table entry from above.
Conjunction analysis of (b) positive correlations with positive × evaluative, as rated by the automated sentiment analyzer and (c) positive correlations with enthusiasm, as rated by human coders.
| TPJ | 45 | −57 | 37 | 28 |
Associations between neural activity in participants' brains and ratings of interest of their post-scan descriptions.