Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 13:1 (2014) ► pp.77–97

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

What can software tell us about political candidates?

A critical analysis of a computerized method for political discourse

 | Temple University |
Published online: 15 May 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.13.1.04kan
This study evaluates a computerized text analysis program, Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC), by investigating the relationship between the discourse and personalities of presidential and vice presidential candidates in the 2008 presidential election in the United States. Analyses of speech samples (N = 141) from Barack Obama, Joe Biden, John McCain, and Sarah Palin were conducted using LIWC. The results show that in the context of political speech events, such as media interviews, political candidates make unique linguistic choices, which may be interpreted as displaying distinct personality traits. Yet, despite the statistical significance of the results, there are salient limitations of utilizing computerized methodologies to analyze political speech events, such as the limited interpretative capacity of the software to understand pragmatic and contextual language use.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Discourse studies methods
    • 2.2Linguistic inquiry and word count methods
  • 3.Research design
    • 3.1Data collection
    • 3.2Data analysis
  • 4.Results
    • 1.Cognitive Complexity
    • 2.Honesty
    • 3.Presidentiality
    • 4.Depression
  • 5.Discussion of results
  • 6.Limitations
    • 6.1Quantitative limitations
    • 6.2Qualitative limitations
  • 7.Conclusions and future directions
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (22)
References
Abe, Jo Ann A. 2011. “Changes in Alan Greenspan’s Language Use Across the Economic Cycle: A Text Analysis of his Testimonies and Speeches.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 30 (2): 212–223. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2011. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul. 2004. Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ekström, Mats. 2009. “Power and Affiliation in Presidential Press Conferences.” Journal of Language and Politics 8 (3): 386–415. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huck, Schuyler W. 2012. Reading Statistics and Research. Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levine, Kenneth J., Naeemah Clark, Daniel M. Haygood, and Robert A. Muenchen. 2011. “Change: How Young Voters Interpreted the Messages Sent During the 2008 Presidential Election Season.” American Behavioral Scientist 55 (4): 479–501. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Myers, Greg. 2008. “Analyzing Interactions in Broadcast Debates.” In Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Michal Krzyzanowski, 121–144. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newman, Matthew L., Carla J. Groom, Lori D. Handelman, and James W. Pennebaker. 2008. “Gender Differences in Language Use: An Analysis of 14,000 Text Samples.” Discourse Processes 451: 211–236. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Newman, Matthew L., James W. Pennebaker, Diane S. Berry, and Jane M. Richards. 2003. “Lying Words: Predicting Deception from Linguistic Styles.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 291: 665–675. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W., Cindy K. Chung, Molly Ireland, Amy Gonzales, and Roger J. Booth. 2007. The Development and Psychometric Properties of LIWC2007. Austin, TX: University of Texas. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W., and Laura A. King. 1999. “Linguistic Styles: Language Use as an Individual Difference.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 771: 1296–1312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W., and Thomas C. Lay. 2002. “Language Use and Personality Crises: Analyses of Major Rudolph Giuliani Press Conferences.” Journal of Research in Personality 361: 271–282. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W., Matthias R. Mehl, and Kate Niederhoffer. 2003. “Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves.” Annual Review of Psychology 541: 547–577. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pennebaker, James W., Richard B. Slatcher, and Cindy K. Chung. 2005. “Linguistic Markers of Psychological State through Media Interviews: John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004, Al Gore in 2000.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 5 (1): 197–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rude, Stephanie S., Eva-Maria Gortner, and James W. Pennebaker. 2004. “Language Use of Depressed and Depressed-Vulnerable College Students.” Cognition and Emotion 18 (8): 1121–1133. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Slatcher, Richard B., Cindy K. Chung, James W. Pennebaker, and Lori D. Stone. 2007. “Winning Words: Individual Differences in Linguistic Style among U.S. Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates.” Journal of Research in Personality 411: 63–75. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stirman, Shannon Wiltsey, and James W. Pennebaker. 2001. “Word Use in the Poetry of Suicidal and Nonsuicidal Poets.” Psychosomatic Medicine 631: 517–522.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tausczik, Yla R., and James W. Pennebaker. 2010. “The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29 (1): 24–54. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
“The Choice.” [Editorial]. The New Yorker. Retrieved from [URL]
Wasburn, Philo C., and Mara H. Wasburn. 2011. “Media Coverage of Women in Politics: The Curious Case of Sarah Palin.” Media, Culture and Society 33 (7): 1027–1041. Doi: .Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winter, David G. 2005. “Things I’ve Learned about Personality from Studying Political Leaders at a Distance.” Journal of Personality 73 (3): 557–584. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (13)

Cited by 13 other publications

Sajadi, Amirali, Kostadin Damevski & Preetha Chatterjee
2026. Psycholinguistic analyses in software engineering text: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology 189 ► pp. 107913 ff. DOI logo
Althuwaini, Anas M., Susan C. Herring & Samuel G. Obeng
2025. Users’ Discourse from primarily US-focused subreddits about the Political Image of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from 2015 to 2023. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 17 ► pp. 100543 ff. DOI logo
Garzón-Velandia, Diana Camila & James W. Pennebaker
2025. A Linguistic Strategy to Measure Negative Affective Polarization Through Text Content. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 44:6 ► pp. 881 ff. DOI logo
Ko, Seongkyu, Junyeop Cha, Eunil Park & Angel P. del Pobil
2025. Exploring political orientation: a comparative analysis of news media and government responses to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 12:1 DOI logo
McHugh, Patrick & Ja-Nae Duane
2025. Upper echelons theory: Research at the nexus of CEO psychological profiles, gender, and firm diversity. Journal of Management & Organization ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Körner, Robert, Jennifer R. Overbeck, Erik Körner & Astrid Schütz
2022. How the Linguistic Styles of Donald Trump and Joe Biden Reflect Different Forms of Power. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 41:6 ► pp. 631 ff. DOI logo
Li, Tao & Kaibao Hu
2021. Corpus-Based Translation Studies and Political Discourse Analysis. In Reappraising Self and Others [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 6], ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo
Monaco, Eleonora, Gianni Onesti, Diogo Cruz & Pierangelo Rosati
2021. It’s Not Only What You Say but “How” You Say It: Linguistic Styles and ICOs Success. In Exploring Innovation in a Digital World [Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation, 51], ► pp. 109 ff. DOI logo
Antonetti, Paolo, Benedetta Crisafulli & Constantine S. Katsikeas
2020. Does it really hurt? Making sense of varieties of anger. Psychology & Marketing 37:11 ► pp. 1465 ff. DOI logo
Esposito, Eduardo & Francesco Mirone
2019. New challenges in corporate governance: Theory and practice, ► pp. 236 ff. DOI logo
Aerts, Walter & Beibei Yan
2017. Rhetorical impression management in the letter to shareholders and institutional setting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 30:2 ► pp. 404 ff. DOI logo
Parhankangas, Annaleena & Maija Renko
2017. Linguistic style and crowdfunding success among social and commercial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing 32:2 ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo
Song, Yunya & Yin Zhang
2017. What Can Software Tell Us About Media Coverage and Public Opinion? An Analysis of Political News Posts and Audience Comments on Facebook by Computerised Method. In Social Informatics [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10540], ► pp. 230 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue