<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd">
  <responseDate>2026-07-23T16:36:44Z</responseDate>
  <request identifier="14573" metadataPrefix="oai_dc" verb="GetRecord">https://drops.dagstuhl.de/oai</request>
  <GetRecord>
    <record>
      <header>
        <identifier>oai:drops-oai.dagstuhl.de:14573</identifier>
        <datestamp>2024-03-06T10:31:29Z</datestamp>
        <setSpec>ddc:004</setSpec>
        <setSpec>open_access</setSpec>
      </header>
      <metadata>
        <oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
          <dc:title>A Review and Cluster Analysis of German Polarity Resources for Sentiment Analysis</dc:title>
          <dc:creator>Kern, Bettina M. J.</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Baumann, Andreas</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Kolb, Thomas E.</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Sekanina, Katharina</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Hofmann, Klaus</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Wissik, Tanja</dc:creator>
          <dc:creator>Neidhardt, Julia</dc:creator>
          <dc:subject>cluster analysis</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>sentiment polarity</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>sentiment analysis</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>German</dc:subject>
          <dc:subject>review</dc:subject>
          <dc:description>The domain of German polarity dictionaries is heterogeneous with many small dictionaries created for different purposes and using different methods. This paper aims to map out the landscape of freely available German polarity dictionaries by clustering them to uncover similarities and shared features. We find that, although most dictionaries seem to agree in their assessment of a word’s sentiment, subsets of them form groups of interrelated dictionaries. These dependencies are in most cases an immediate reflex of how these dictionaries were designed and compiled. As a consequence, we argue that sentiment evaluation should be based on multiple and diverse sentiment resources in order to avoid error propagation and amplification of potential biases.</dc:description>
          <dc:publisher>Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik</dc:publisher>
          <dc:contributor>Bettina M. J. Kern and Andreas Baumann and Thomas E. Kolb and Katharina Sekanina and Klaus Hofmann and Tanja Wissik and Julia Neidhardt</dc:contributor>
          <dc:date>2021</dc:date>
          <dc:relation>Is Part Of OASIcs, Volume 93, 3rd Conference on Language, Data and Knowledge (LDK 2021)</dc:relation>
          <dc:type>InProceedings</dc:type>
          <dc:type>Text</dc:type>
          <dc:type>doc-type:ResearchArticle</dc:type>
          <dc:type>publishedVersion</dc:type>
          <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
          <dc:identifier>doi:10.4230/OASIcs.LDK.2021.37</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-145734</dc:identifier>
          <dc:identifier>https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.LDK.2021.37</dc:identifier>
          <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
          <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
        </oai_dc:dc>
      </metadata>
    </record>
  </GetRecord>
</OAI-PMH>
