Words of Warmth: Social-Perception Norms via Best-Worst Scaling
Rate individual English words on four social-perception dimensions - warmth, competence, sociability, and trust - using Best-Worst Scaling. Annotators see a 4-tuple of words and pick the highest and lowest word for each dimension; real-valued scores are derived from best-minus-worst counts. This is the annotation design behind Words of Warmth, a lexicon of 26,000+ words (and multiword expressions) that complements affect lexicons like NRC-VAD and WorryWords by capturing the warmth/competence axes from the social psychology Stereotype Content Model (Mohammad, ACL 2025).
Configuration Fileconfig.yaml
This Potato config reproduces the annotation task. Save it as config.yaml and run potato start config.yaml to try it.
# Words of Warmth: Social-Perception Norms via Best-Worst Scaling
# Based on Mohammad (ACL 2025), "Words of Warmth: Trust and Sociability
# Norms for over 26k English Words."
#
# Words of Warmth extends affect lexicons (valence/arousal/dominance,
# emotion intensity, anxiety) to the SOCIAL-PERCEPTION space studied in
# social psychology's Stereotype Content Model. Two primary dimensions
# organize how we perceive people and groups:
# - Warmth: is this entity friendly / well-intentioned / trustworthy?
# - Competence: is this entity capable / skilled / effective?
# Warmth is further decomposed into two facets:
# - Sociability: friendliness, likability, being pleasant to be around.
# - Trust: honesty, morality, dependability.
#
# Best-Worst Scaling (BWS / MaxDiff) annotation design:
# - Annotators are shown a set (tuple) of four words.
# - For each dimension they pick the ONE word that is highest and the ONE
# word that is lowest on that dimension.
# - Each word appears in many different 4-tuples across the study.
# - A real-valued score in [0, 1] per word is later computed as the
# proportion of times chosen best minus the proportion chosen worst.
# BWS yields far more reliable scores than absolute numeric ratings.
#
# Annotation guidelines:
# 1. Judge the word's typical, out-of-context social association - the
# impression it evokes about a person or group described by it.
# 2. Answer each dimension independently. A word can be high on one and
# low on another (e.g., "ruthless" is low warmth but high competence;
# "clumsy" is high warmth-ish but low competence).
# 3. The best and worst word may differ across the four dimensions.
# 4. If a word is unfamiliar, use the Skip button rather than guessing.
annotation_task_name: "Words of Warmth Best-Worst Scaling"
task_dir: "."
data_files:
- sample-data.json
item_properties:
id_key: "id"
text_key: "prompt"
text_display_key: "prompt"
list_display_key: "options"
output_annotation_dir: "annotation_output/"
output_annotation_format: "json"
annotation_schemes:
# ---- Warmth (overall) ----
- annotation_type: radio
name: warmth_best
description: "WARMTH - which word conveys the MOST warmth (friendly, well-intentioned)?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
- annotation_type: radio
name: warmth_worst
description: "WARMTH - which word conveys the LEAST warmth (cold, ill-intentioned)?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
# ---- Competence ----
- annotation_type: radio
name: competence_best
description: "COMPETENCE - which word conveys the MOST capability / skill?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
- annotation_type: radio
name: competence_worst
description: "COMPETENCE - which word conveys the LEAST capability / skill?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
# ---- Sociability (facet of warmth) ----
- annotation_type: radio
name: sociability_best
description: "SOCIABILITY - which word is MOST likable / pleasant to be around?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
- annotation_type: radio
name: sociability_worst
description: "SOCIABILITY - which word is LEAST likable / pleasant to be around?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
# ---- Trust / morality (facet of warmth) ----
- annotation_type: radio
name: trust_best
description: "TRUST - which word conveys the MOST honesty / dependability?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
- annotation_type: radio
name: trust_worst
description: "TRUST - which word conveys the LEAST honesty / dependability?"
labels:
- "Word 1"
- "Word 2"
- "Word 3"
- "Word 4"
allow_all_users: true
instances_per_annotator: 100
annotation_per_instance: 4
allow_skip: true
skip_reason_required: false
Sample Datasample-data.json
[
{
"id": "wow_001",
"prompt": "Word 1: friendly | Word 2: ruthless | Word 3: brilliant | Word 4: clumsy",
"options": [
"friendly",
"ruthless",
"brilliant",
"clumsy"
]
},
{
"id": "wow_002",
"prompt": "Word 1: generous | Word 2: cruel | Word 3: skilled | Word 4: incompetent",
"options": [
"generous",
"cruel",
"skilled",
"incompetent"
]
}
]
// ... and 8 more itemsTry it live — no install
Boot the real Potato server in your browser (WebAssembly) and annotate with this exact config. Nothing leaves your machine.
▶ Run live in your browserGet This Design
Clone or download from the repository
Quick start:
git clone https://github.com/davidjurgens/potato-showcase.git cd potato-showcase/text/emotion-sentiment/words-of-warmth-bws potato start config.yaml
Dataset & paper
Mohammad, ACL 2025
Citation (BibTeX)
@inproceedings{mohammad-2025-words,
title = "Words of Warmth: Trust and Sociability Norms for over 26k {E}nglish Words",
author = "Mohammad, Saif M.",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)",
year = "2025",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-long.922"
}Details
Annotation Types
Domain
Use Cases
Tags
Found an issue or want to improve this design?
Open an IssueRelated Designs
NRC Affect Intensity: Word Emotion Intensity via Best-Worst Scaling
Rate individual English words for the INTENSITY of a basic emotion (anger, fear, joy, or sadness) using Best-Worst Scaling. Within an emotion, annotators see a 4-tuple of words all associated with that emotion and pick the word conveying the most and the least of it; real-valued intensity scores in [0,1] are derived from best-minus-worst counts. This is the annotation design behind the NRC Affect Intensity Lexicon of ~6,000 word-emotion intensity scores (Mohammad, LREC 2018). It complements the NRC-VAD (dimensional) and tweet-level emotion-intensity designs with word-level categorical-emotion intensity.
NRC Emotion Lexicon (EmoLex): Word-Emotion Association
Crowdsourced annotation of a word's associations with eight basic emotions (anger, anticipation, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise, trust) and two polarities (positive, negative). Each word first goes through a word-choice question that both disambiguates the intended sense and screens inattentive workers, then annotators rate how strongly the word is associated with each emotion. This is the annotation design behind the NRC Word-Emotion Association Lexicon (EmoLex; Mohammad & Turney, 2013), available in 100+ languages.
NRC-VAD: Valence, Arousal & Dominance via Best-Worst Scaling
Rate individual English words on three affective dimensions - valence (pleasant-unpleasant), arousal (active-calm), and dominance (in control-controlled) - using Best-Worst Scaling. Annotators see a 4-tuple of words and pick the highest and lowest word for each dimension; real-valued scores are derived from best-minus-worst counts. This is the annotation design behind the NRC-VAD Lexicon of 20,000+ words (Mohammad, ACL 2018).