Second Presidential Debate: What can we learn from I vs We?
Although it’s been hard to resist reading the news about the previous night’s debates each morning, I have been relying on our analysis of the presidential debates for a first impression. Like with email communication, experiencing the debates minus any visual or verbal context (and not even in sentence form initially) can leave much up to interpretation, and we’re left with word choices, and the meanings of those words (which can imply feelings and context) to figure it out.
While much of the analysis here is straightforward, one interesting aspect of using semantic analysis is that it is able to distinguish the most important sentences and words in text, determined not by frequency, but by a complex algorithm that looks at the logical role, co-occurrences with related terms, etc. Using this, we can identify the most important words and concepts that are being conveyed, those that are central and critical to the overall text (see “Most Important Nouns” in the graphic below).
Some of the most interesting discoveries were the use of “Romney,” which was cited as the most important term used by President Obama in last night’s debate (Could this mean that he took a more aggressive and forceful approach to his opponent this time?), and Romney’s use of “I” over “we” (Obama was fairly equal in use of both).
Take a look at our newest infographic to see some of the other ‘curiosities’ that our analysis uncovered. Until the next debate……
Author: Luca Scagliarini