StoreItAll's analytics team runs sentiment analysis on customer feedback without first removing stopwords or correcting spelling errors. The results suggest that most reviews are neutral, even though manual reading shows many customers expressing strong opinions. What is the most likely cause of this misleading result?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question recap: StoreItAll's analytics team performed sentiment analysis without stopword removal or spelling correction, and the automated results show mostly neutral sentiment, while manual reviews reveal strong opinions. We will evaluate each option to understand which explains the misleading result most plausibly.

Option 1: The algorithm used was not advanced enough. While using a less sophisticated model can hurt accuracy, this answer is too broad given the specific setup described (no stopword removal or spelling correction). Even a basic model can pick up sentiment if it focuses on content words with proper preprocessing. Saying it’s simply “not advanced enough” doesn’t directly address the issue of stopwords and noisy text diluting emotional cues, which is the key mismatch highlighted by the scenario.

Option 2: The reviews were too short to analyze. Short texts can indeed pose challenges for sentiment models, but the scenario emphasizes that there is a lot of text containing strong opinions that manual readers detect. The problem isn’t primarily length; it’s the presence of noise and uncorrected spelling that obscures sentiment signals within the text, so this explanation doesn’t fully capture the root cause here.

Option 3: Important emotional words may have been diluted by noise and irrelevant text. This aligns with the described setup: without stopword removal, the dataset contains a lot of neutral, filler words and irrelevant content that can overwhelm or dilute sentiment-bearing terms (like emotionally charged adjectives and verbs). Uncorrected spelling errors can turn positive or negative words into variants that the model doesn’t recognize, further blurring the signal. As a result, the model may output neutral sentiment because the signal-to-noise ratio for emotional cues is lowered, matching the observed discrepancy with manual readings.

Option 4: <All of the provided answers>. This would suggest that every listed factor contributes. However, since one of the options (Option 2) is not a central contributor in this scenario and Option 1 is a broader claim not tightly tied to the described preprocessing issue, claiming that all options collectively explain the outcome would be overstating the case. The most direct and plausible explanation remains the dilution of emotional words by noise and irrelevant text, making this option less accurate.

Option 5: The Bag of Words model is not capable of analyzing sentiment. It’s true that BoW has limitations and ignores word order, negations, and context, but it can still detect sentiment signals when preprocessing is done (e.g., stopword removal, normalization). In this scenario, the specific failure mode is not BoW's inherent limitation but the absence of preprocessing steps that preserve or highlight sentiment-bearing terms, so this explanation doesn’t directly address why sentiment appears neutral.

Summary of reasoning: The most coherent explanation given the described preprocessing gap is that emotional cues were overwhelmed by noise and irrelevant text, causing sentiment signals to be diluted and leading to neutral outputs despite strong opinions visible on manual review. Other options either misattribute the cause to a broader model inadequacy, to text length, to an overbroad claim, or to a general limitation of BoW without tying it to the missing preprocessing step that directly affects sentiment signal strength.

IS 4487-006 Fall 2025 Week 13 - Comprehension Quiz

查看解析

登录即可查看完整答案

类似问题

Companies can find out a lot about customers by listening to (and monitoring) what they say on their social networks, blogs, review sites, and so on. One technique that firms use to monitor such activity is called

NRC lexicon maps emotions but not sentiment:

VADER lexicon can analyze acronyms and initializations:

Lexicons differ in (select one best answer):

Lexicon in opinion mining and sentiment analysis is defined as (select one best answer):

The unsupervised machine learning approach to sentiment analysis is based on:

更多留学生实用工具

考试浏览器助手

风格化写作助手

论文查重助手

文献引用助手

课堂转译助手

课堂笔记助手

Quiz搜索助手

学校历年真题

智能刷题助手

智能匹配练习

希望你的学习变得更简单