Many academic fields use content analysis. At the core of most common content analysis lies frequency distribution of individual words. Websites and documents are mined for usage and frequency of certain words. In this article, we introduce a community-contributed command, wordfreq, to process content (online and local) and to prepare a frequency distribution of individual words. Additionally, another community-contributed command, wordcloud, is introduced to draw a simple word cloud graph for visual analysis of the frequent usage of specific words.
ChungC. K., and PennebakerJ. W.2013. Counting little words in big data: The psychology of individuals, communities, culture, and history. In Social Cognition and Communication, ed. ForgasJ. P., LászlóJ., and VinczeO., 25–42. New York: Psychology Press.
2.
Downe-WamboldtB.1992. Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International13: 313–321.
3.
GrimmerJ., and StewartB. M.2013. Text as data: The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts. Political Analysis21: 267–297.
4.
HopkinsD. J., and KingG.2010. A method of automated nonparametric content analysis for social science. American Journal of Political Science54: 229–247.
5.
KassarjianH. H.1977. Content analysis in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research4: 8–18.
6.
KolbeR. H., and BurnettM. S.1991. Content-analysis research: An examination of applications with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity. Journal of Consumer Research18: 243–250.
7.
LaverM., BenoitK., and GarryJ.2003. Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review97: 311–331.
8.
PennebakerJ. W., FrancisM. E., and BoothR. J.2001. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC2001.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9.
RobertsC. W.1989. Other than counting words: A linguistic approach to content analysis. Social Forces68: 147–177.
10.
ScottW. A.1955. Reliability of content analysis: The case of nominal scale coding. Public Opinion Quarterly19: 321–325.
