Is TweetPsych the oddest or scariest new Twitter application…

Social scientist (or possibly mad professor) Dan Zarella has now invented what could be a particularly contreversial Twitter application: TweetPsych.

Taken from the main site:

TweetPsych uses two linguistic analysis algorithms (RID and LIWC) to build a psychological profile of a person based on the content of their tweets. The service analyzes your last 1000 tweets and works best on users who have posted more than 1000 updates. It also works best on accounts that are operated by a single user and use Twitter in a conversational manner, rather than simply a content distribution platform.

There’s a bit more detail on his blog, going into what RID and LIWC actually are.

The interesting bit is that compared to most other forms of writing and communication, Twitter is probably the closest to being able to express yourself with little or no thought – it’s simple, quick, and you can hide yourself behind a fake persona or a protected account.

The worrying thing is that it opens up your Twitter account to analysis by  friends, families and employees with little or no knowledge of linguistics and profiling.

In fact, the first comments on Dan’s post are discussing using NLP to influence people to puchase via advertising, the difficulty of interpreting the results, and the fact that it could easily be misused.

And without casting any aspersions on Dan’s skills, the possibility of an error appearing in an automated system isn’t unheard of…

Without being able to intepret my results effectively, feel free to explain them to me! Is it good that ‘Positive Emotions’ comes in at No.5, or bad that No.14 appears to be ‘Sad’.

A warning for employers – block social networks and lose employees

In the spirit of the internet, I found this fascinating bit of research, which originated on Vnunet.com, via Rialtas.net and eventually the Wikinomics blog!

“A survey of 1,000 office staff has found that nearly a third of younger employees would consider quitting their job if Facebook was banned in the workplace.

The survey by IT services firm Telindus found that 39 per cent of 18 to 24 year-olds would consider leaving if they were not allowed to access applications like Facebook and YouTube.

A further 21 per cent indicated that they would feel ‘annoyed’ by such a ban.

The problem is less acute with 25 to 65 year-olds, of whom just 16 per cent would consider leaving and 13 per cent would be annoyed.”

As someone in the *ahem* slightly older age bracket (closer to 25 than 65 though!), I paused for a moment to consider my own response. Considering my role in community strategy and management, I surprised myself by starting from a position of thinking quitting was overreacting and I’d just do my networking via mobile/at home. Then I thought about how useful and valuable the networks have been to my company, considering the knowledge, experience and contacts it’s given me.

Why would I spend time networking to benefit my company (rather than just myself), without my company giving something back? It’s exactly the same value exchange that drives user-generated content, and yet employers seem quicker to accept the general internet population need a value exchange more readily than for their own employees!

(Obviously some of the survey respondents might be less brave if the situation presented itself, but then again, in an age in which the network is probably the most valuable asset, companies risk losing the employees who are most valuable)