Identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship: a response to Chaski

Tim D. Grant, Kevin L. Baker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In response to Chaski’s article (published in this volume) an examination is made of the methodological understanding necessary to identify dependable markers for forensic (and general) authorship attribution work. This examination concentrates on three methodological areas of concern which researchers intending to identify markers of authorship must address. These areas are sampling linguistic data, establishing the reliability of authorship markers and establishing the validity of authorship markers. It is suggested that the complexity of sampling problems in linguistic data is often underestimated and that theoretical issues in this area are both difficult and unresolved. It is further argued that the concepts of reliability and validity must be well understood and accounted for in any attempts to identify authorship markers and that largely this is not done. Finally, Principal Component Analysis is identified as an alternative approach which avoids some of the methodological problems inherent in identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship.
LanguageEnglish
Pages66-79
Number of pages14
JournalInternational Journal of Speech, Language and the Law
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2001

Fingerprint

linguistics
examination
attribution

Keywords

  • authorship attribution
  • markers of authorship
  • reliability
  • validity
  • sampling
  • stylometrics

Cite this

@article{be439e8ed8d94d0991b0b553b4d7af9d,
title = "Identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship: a response to Chaski",
abstract = "In response to Chaski’s article (published in this volume) an examination is made of the methodological understanding necessary to identify dependable markers for forensic (and general) authorship attribution work. This examination concentrates on three methodological areas of concern which researchers intending to identify markers of authorship must address. These areas are sampling linguistic data, establishing the reliability of authorship markers and establishing the validity of authorship markers. It is suggested that the complexity of sampling problems in linguistic data is often underestimated and that theoretical issues in this area are both difficult and unresolved. It is further argued that the concepts of reliability and validity must be well understood and accounted for in any attempts to identify authorship markers and that largely this is not done. Finally, Principal Component Analysis is identified as an alternative approach which avoids some of the methodological problems inherent in identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship.",
keywords = "authorship attribution, markers of authorship, reliability, validity, sampling, stylometrics",
author = "Grant, {Tim D.} and Baker, {Kevin L.}",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1558/sll.2001.8.1.66",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "66--79",
journal = "International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law",
issn = "1748-8885",
publisher = "Equinox Publishing Ltd",
number = "1",

}

Identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship: a response to Chaski. / Grant, Tim D.; Baker, Kevin L.

In: International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2001, p. 66-79.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship: a response to Chaski

AU - Grant, Tim D.

AU - Baker, Kevin L.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - In response to Chaski’s article (published in this volume) an examination is made of the methodological understanding necessary to identify dependable markers for forensic (and general) authorship attribution work. This examination concentrates on three methodological areas of concern which researchers intending to identify markers of authorship must address. These areas are sampling linguistic data, establishing the reliability of authorship markers and establishing the validity of authorship markers. It is suggested that the complexity of sampling problems in linguistic data is often underestimated and that theoretical issues in this area are both difficult and unresolved. It is further argued that the concepts of reliability and validity must be well understood and accounted for in any attempts to identify authorship markers and that largely this is not done. Finally, Principal Component Analysis is identified as an alternative approach which avoids some of the methodological problems inherent in identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship.

AB - In response to Chaski’s article (published in this volume) an examination is made of the methodological understanding necessary to identify dependable markers for forensic (and general) authorship attribution work. This examination concentrates on three methodological areas of concern which researchers intending to identify markers of authorship must address. These areas are sampling linguistic data, establishing the reliability of authorship markers and establishing the validity of authorship markers. It is suggested that the complexity of sampling problems in linguistic data is often underestimated and that theoretical issues in this area are both difficult and unresolved. It is further argued that the concepts of reliability and validity must be well understood and accounted for in any attempts to identify authorship markers and that largely this is not done. Finally, Principal Component Analysis is identified as an alternative approach which avoids some of the methodological problems inherent in identifying reliable, valid markers of authorship.

KW - authorship attribution

KW - markers of authorship

KW - reliability

KW - validity

KW - sampling

KW - stylometrics

UR - http://journals.equinoxpub.com/IJSLL/article/view/1691

U2 - 10.1558/sll.2001.8.1.66

DO - 10.1558/sll.2001.8.1.66

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 66

EP - 79

JO - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

T2 - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

JF - International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law

SN - 1748-8885

IS - 1

ER -