Social Dynamics

About

Receptiviti’s Social Dynamics framework provides access to seven measures that evaluate a number of important aspects of how people are focused on themselves, focused on other people, whether they communicate with authenticity, clout, hesitation, the degree to which they communicate formally or informally, and more.

Note: The Social Dynamics framework is bundled in the Personality package together with the Big 5 Personality and Drives frameworks.

{
    "plan_usage": {
      "word_limit": 250000,
      "words_used": 1594,
      "words_remaining": 248406,
      "percent_used": 0.64,
      "start_date": "2021-01-01T00:00:00Z",
      "end_date": "2021-01-31T23:59:59Z"
    },
    "results": [
      {
        "response_id": "576920d5-ac3b-4fac-b7f5-a00189a6f194",
        "language": "en",
        "version": "v1.0.0",
        "summary": {
          "word_count": 3,
          "words_per_sentence": 3,
          "sentence_count": 1,
          "six_plus_words": 0.6666666666666666,
          "capitals": 0.043478260869565216,
          "emojis": 0,
          "emoticons": 0,
          "hashtags": 0,
          "urls": 0
        },
        "personality": {...},
        "social_dynamics": {
          "social": 0.007925820968322467,
          "affiliation": 0.1299903474239308,
          "inward_focus": 1.0172440920716201,
          "outward_focus": 0.1324174459985103,
          "authentic": 0.2801656397434509,
          "negations": 0.49818539816792373,
          "clout": 63.64608669407779
        },
        "drives": {...},
        "cognition": {...},
        "additional_indicators": {...},
        "sallee": {...},
        "liwc": {...}
      }
    ]
  }

Measures

Additional Information on the Social Dynamics Measures

Social

Social words are a marker of social engagement and are associated with awareness of other people. This vast category of words makes reference to other people, and includes certain pronouns, possessives, social nouns (i.e., brother, team), social verbs (i.e., participate, listen), social adjectives (i.e., trusting, secret), and more. When individuals use Social words, they are inherently thinking about or interacting with other people. Therefore, people who communicate using a higher level of Social words are generally more socially-conscious.

Affiliation

The Affiliation measure includes language that relates to connecting and being in the presence of other people. Words in this category are related to the Social measure but measure different phenomena. The Social measure is a marker of social engagement and is associated with awareness of other people.

Examples of related research:

The Affiliation indicator has been used extensively in research. For example it has been used to examine gender differences in evaluations of emergency medicine residents and their approach to patient care. Research has also shown that the feeling of affiliation or the need to affiliate with others can also play a role in promoting positive or negative health behaviours.

Inward Focus

The Inward Focus measure analyzes if an individual's language is focused on themselves, or outwardly focused on other people. The more someone uses “I” and self-related words, the more focused they are on themselves.

How we see ourselves in the world is vitally important to how we interact within it. While research is still being done on the implications of self-focused language, we know it holds important information on how we communicate and behave in the world around us.

Examples of related research:

Self-focus has been an important factor for researchers investigating status, age, depression, and more. For example, lower status individuals tend to use language that is more self-focused and tentative, people tend to become less self-focused with age, and depressed individuals are more self-focused than their non-depressed counterparts. While this category is not intended to be used for deception detection purposes, deceptive statements have been found to be more distanced from the self than truthful ones.

Outward Focus

The Outward Focus measure determines the degree to which a person’s language is focused on themselves or on other people by evaluating their use of “I” words and other self-referencing language.

A high score suggests a significant focus on people or entities other than oneself. A low score suggests minimal to no focus on other people or entities other than oneself.

Examples of related research:

Self-focus has been an important factor for researchers investigating status, age, depression, and more. For example, lower status individuals tend to use language that is more self-focused and tentative, people tend to become more Outward Focused with age, and [depressed individuals are more self-focused than their non-depressed counterparts]( depressed individuals are more self-focused than their non-depressed counterparts). While this category is not intended to be used for detecting deception, research has shown that [deceptive statements have been found to be more distanced from the self](deceptive statements have been found to be more distanced from the self) (ie. Outward Focused) than truthful ones.

Authentic

The Authentic measure evaluates when someone is speaking naturally and uninhibited or whether they are carefully curating their words. A person may change their language for multiple reasons, such as to be more easily understood to align with expected tone or style or to avoid mentioning specific things.

When evaluating authenticity it is important to compare samples within the same context as to ensure the accuracy of the results. When someone is communicating inauthentically they tend to distance themselves from their words. Authentic communicators tend to speak their mind use their own language and care less about the specific words they choose to use. People with high authenticity scores tend to be seen as relatable down-to-earth and honest.

Examples of related research:

Studies relating to language and authenticity are vast. For example, some research has shown that low Authenticity scores are correlated with deception, how changes in writing style are related to fraudulent data reporting, and how it is possible to detect deceptive discussions in quarterly earnings calls.

Negations

Language in this category contains a range of negative language and contractions, such as wouldn’t, shouldn’t, don’t, cannot, etc. This category, combined with other measures of Social Dynamics, Personality, and Emotions can be helpful to understand more about how people feel about topics and the world around them, as well as aspects of the dynamics of their relationships with others.

Examples of related research:

Negations have been used by researchers to investigate a variety of social behaviours. For example, research has shown that emotion words are positively correlated with negation use. Additionally, research suggests that people who score high on extraversion in personality tests use negations less frequently.

Clout​

The Clout measure evaluates whether language is influential and leadership-like, or whether it is more passive and less persuasive. Language with lower Clout scores may not be intended to draw audiences in, or to inspire action. Clout can be context- and subject-specific; an individual with a low Clout score in one context may express a higher Clout score and have the ability to be influential in a different context.

Examples of related research:

Research has shown that people with lower status levels are more focused on themselves, whereas leaders are more focused on others and the group as a whole. This phenomenon has been documented across a range of social and linguistic contexts, group sizes, and settings. It is important to note that this focus on others does not suggest that leaders put others before themselves, but rather that they’re particularly attentive to the behaviour and mental states of others. As such, studies have found that people who are attentive towards others will naturally be able to lead more effectively than those with attention directed inwards.

Specs and Examples

Scores in the Social Dynamics framework are always in the range of 0 to 100. Our measures are baselined against our proprietary datasets, which consist of language samples that exceed 350 words.

A language sample that generates a score of 80 implies that 80% of all samples in our curated baseline dataset have scores that are less than the score of the language sample being analyzed.

Note: Results will be most reliable when your text sample is >350 words in length.

Let's look at a couple of examples:

Example 1 - I'm completely and totally at fault. This was my folly and my burden to bear. I'm terribly sorry about this blunder and shall endeavour to never let it happen again. I'm sort of clumsy - I've always known that about myself. For the first time today though, my clumsiness has been the cause for great pain. I know I can never replace the urn - it did after-all hold great sentimental value - but I can help to bridge the emotional void that its absence is sure to create.

In the paragraph above, the individual is apologizing for a blunder they have made and in so doing, is focusing entirely on their part in the mishap. We see this reflected in a very low social score of 0.015. This means that only 0.015% of samples in our curated baseline dataset have social scores lower than this sample. Since the language used does not convey confidence, and is rather humble and anxious, we notice a very low clout score of 1.67%.

// partial response
{
  "social_dynamics": {
    "clout": 1.674828788145617,
    "social": 0.015902273194698016
  }
}

Example 2 - I'm completely and totally at fault. I'm doing everything in my power to fix this and make it up to you. I know I can make this situation better - just watch me do it. I may be clumsy, but I know every dark cloud has a shining silver lining. I cannot replace the urn - it held an important spot in your life. I will, however, have a custom urn made in its place. I know the best glassblower on the east coast and she makes the most amazing artistic creations. I will right this. You can count on me to do what's right.

// partial response
{
  "social_dynamics": {
    "clout": 14.792684497730718,
    "social": 6.382687563051101
  }
}

The tone of the paragraph in Example 2 remains apologetic, but indicates a desire to find a positive solution to a bad situation. Accordingly, the text shows more confidence and less anxiousness, increasing the clout score to 14.7. This means that 14.7% of the samples in our baseline dataset have lower clout scores than the example paragraph above. While this score is still not very high, the text shows decidedly more clout than Example 1.