For gender, the system checks the profile for about 150 common male and 150 common female first names, as well as for gender related words, such as father, mother, wife and husband.If no cue is found in a user s profile, no gender is assigned.
One gets the impression that gender recognition is more sociological than linguistic, showing what women and men were blogging about back in A later study (Goswami et al.
2009) managed to increase the gender recognition quality to 89.2%, using sentence length, 35 non-dictionary words, and 52 slang words.
The authors do not report the set of slang words, but the non-dictionary words appear to be more related to style than to content, showing that purely linguistic behaviour can contribute information for gender recognition as well.
The age component of the system is described in (Nguyen et al. The authors apply logistic and linear regression on counts of token unigrams occurring at least 10 times in their corpus.
The paper does not describe the gender component, but the first author has informed us that the accuracy of the gender recognition on the basis of 200 tweets is about 87% (Nguyen, personal communication). (2014) did a crowdsourcing experiment, in which they asked human participants to guess the gender and age on the basis of 20 to 40 tweets. on this, we will still take the biological gender as the gold standard in this paper, as our eventual goal is creating metadata for the Twi NL collection. Experimental Data and Evaluation In this section, we first describe the corpus that we used in our experiments (Section 3.1).
For all techniques and features, we ran the same 5-fold cross-validation experiments in order to determine how well they could be used to distinguish between male and female authors of tweets.