Paweł Lenartowicz

Jan Sikora, Paweł Lenartowicz, Hubert Plisiecki

Cross-cultural comparison of psychological meaning requires methods that go beyond word-level translation and examine how semantic dimensions are organized across languages. We introduce a cross-lingual extension of the Supervised Semantic Differential (SSD), which estimates supervised semantic gradients in embedding space and compares them across aligned multilingual word embeddings. The method tests gradient alignment and difference using permutation procedures and bootstrap intervals, and interprets residual differences through clustering around the difference gradient. We demonstrate the approach on Polish, English, and French affective norm lexicons, modeling Valence, Arousal, and Dominance where available. Affective dimensions were significantly recoverable across languages and model settings. Cross-lingual comparisons showed broad alignment together with structured residual differences: Valence appeared mostly shared, whereas Arousal and Dominance produced more interpretable contrasts involving bodily threat, aesthetic stimulation, internal emotionality, macro-level authority, and everyday control. Several clusters also reflected corpus-specific artifacts, underscoring the need for cautious interpretation. Cross-lingual SSD offers an explainable framework for testing semantic alignment, identifying divergence, and generating hypotheses about cross-cultural differences in psychological meaning.

Hubert Plisiecki, Paweł Lenartowicz, Maria Flakus et al.

This paper investigates the presence of political bias in emotion inference models used for sentiment analysis (SA) in social science research. Machine learning models often reflect biases in their training data, impacting the validity of their outcomes. While previous research has highlighted gender and race biases, our study focuses on political bias - an underexplored yet pervasive issue that can skew the interpretation of text data across a wide array of studies. We conducted a bias audit on a Polish sentiment analysis model developed in our lab. By analyzing valence predictions for names and sentences involving Polish politicians, we uncovered systematic differences influenced by political affiliations. Our findings indicate that annotations by human raters propagate political biases into the model's predictions. To mitigate this, we pruned the training dataset of texts mentioning these politicians and observed a reduction in bias, though not its complete elimination. Given the significant implications of political bias in SA, our study emphasizes caution in employing these models for social science research. We recommend a critical examination of SA results and propose using lexicon-based systems as a more ideologically neutral alternative. This paper underscores the necessity for ongoing scrutiny and methodological adjustments to ensure the reliability and impartiality of the use of machine learning in academic and applied contexts.