Psychological Analysis of Tweets Against Hillary Clinton Campaign

This project analyzes a collection of tweets, focusing on those related to the Hillary Clinton campaign. The author of the tweets expresses strong negative emotions towards Hillary Clinton, often criticizing her and praising her opponent, Donald Trump. The analysis identifies potential information warfare tactics, such as using negative language, spreading misinformation, and attempting to influence public opinion. The author employs psychological techniques by repeatedly highlighting negative aspects of Hillary Clinton's actions and character, using hashtags to promote an anti-Hillary sentiment. The project employs random sampling and LIWC analysis to assess the author's emotional tone and influence. The results indicate a high clout value, suggesting a significant attempt to sway public opinion against Hillary Clinton. The author is trying to warn people of miss happening that may happen if they choose Hillary, and tries to praise Trump in comparison to Hillary.

Analysis and hypothesis on Tweets made by Author
To identify the psychological features linked with information warfare, we must first understand the
meaning of information warfare. Information warfare are some techniques which can be used by one to
get an advantage over it’s opponent or competitor. This is done by manipulating the target’s trusted
information by using information it in such a way that the target will unwarily make decisions in the
interest of the one conducting this information warfare. Though this decision will be against the target’s
will but he/she will be unaware of it. Thus, information warfare is strategic and tactical usage of
information to gain advantage over the opponent. Also known as cyberattack or cyberwarfare, this is
done by using information and communication technology.
In the given tweet dataset, the tweets are used to gain advantage for one political candidate
over other. It can be observed that the author is expressing his/her negative emotions in most of the
tweets and he is always successful in expressing his anger and frustration for the candidate named
“Hillary”. Since in this can be done in two ways as praising one over the other or abusing and expressing
negative emotions for the other person. As in these tweets the author seems to be in strong opposition
of the “Hillary”, in most tweets he can be seen criticizing her and praising her opponent “Trump”. The
author’s tweets uses this hashtag “#ThingsMoreTrustedThanHillary “ this may be an indication that he
may be starting an anti-hillary campaign. It can be clearly understood that he is using his tweets to
influence the readers. “#ThingsMoreTrustedThanHillary Gun control. It's not that painful as looking at
her face for more than 5 seconds straight” in this tweet we can see a strong negative emotion against
Hillary, this tweet is abusive and can be seen as misuse of freedom of speech right. There are many
more such offensive tweets which the author has used, like “Her medical record. Will she publish it?”, in
this tweet also he is offensively calling her out in public.
“The witch @HillaryClinton says Trump Foundation a fraud? Woman, #CleanYourOwn house
FIRST before you criticize.” In this tweet, he has again dissed Hillary. This tweet can be considered both
the abusive as well as misconduct as he is calling her a witch and also supporting her opponent against
her. In this way, he is using his personal opinion on public medium to influence other’s opinion also.
Author has used the basic human psychology, It is a fact that when we hear or see something negative
for someone, at first we may ignore it, but repetitive instances will focus our mind and make us think
negative for that person. The same thing has been done in tweets, one by one author is opposing Hillary
by facts and lies. Tweets to support this can be seen as when he says that “will she puclish her medical
report”. This can be considered opposing statement in any sense. Author is trying to prove that Hillary is
a liar, and wants the medical report. Also the way he has tweet. He is not asking to publish her, instead
he is influencing people in wrong way by asking them that will Clinton prove herself right. This is a very
strong statement to prove someone wrong, or to make people’s mind against her, without even said
anything by Hillary.
Tags used by author - Author has used such tags which shows that he strongly dislike Hillary. This can be
seen in the following tweet –

“#TrumpsArmy #TrumpTrain #Trump #NeverHillary #CrookedHillary #VoteTrump #USA #MAGA #MASA
#MakeAmericaGreatAgain #military #Vets #military”
In above tweet, done by author on 9/29/2016. This is a retweet that means , he has tweeted on
someone’s tweet. The tags used by the author are in favour of Trump. That is a good emotion, but most
of the emaotion can be seen opposing Hillary in other tags. This shows that author may be praising
Trump just to go against Hillary. This hypothesis can also be made strong by the tweet-
“#UNGA Putin is one of few world leaders who has his country in his heart”
In this tweet he is praising Putin for having the country in his heart. This tweet shows that either Trump
or Putin, he is praising others just to go against Hillary. This fact can leads us to make a conclusion that,
author hates Hillary, and can go beyond just hating, and can lie to people for going against Hillary. He is
proving that Hillary can be a danger to nation. We have come to this point by the tweet he made-
“Think Before You Vote - Hillary and Obama were the driving force behind the Arab Spring which open
the doors to ISIS”
Author in the above tweet is trying to aware them people of Hillary having her connection with ISIS. This
can be dangerous to nation. Author is trying to warn people that if they vote for Hillary then it may be
the starting of Islamic terrorism in the country. This statement can influence a lot of people who are
against the terrorism. This conclusion is made because of the tweet-
“#HobokenTrainCrash Could this be yet more #Islamist terrorism? Subdue the motorman, then
Mohammed drives it into the station at full speed.”
Above tweet clearly shows the warning of author to the nation’s crowd. Nation if chooses Hillary, then it
may be the starting of Islamic terrorism in the country as clearly said by the author. This shows that
author either is confirmed of the activity of Hillary, or is hating her in so depth that he is saying just to
make people against her. And after such warining to people author is trying to draw attention over the
train accident, and trying to say that there is possibility that it was done by her. This is a very rude and
intentional statement against Hillary, as it can lead to many political wars if something comes out like
this. The author has said this thing in the tweet-
“My prayers go out to the injured & the family members of the dead � I hope & pray #NewJersey
#HobokenTrainCrash was not an intentional act.”
Hypothesis
Overall hypothesis is that the author is trying to warn people the people of miss happening that may
happen if they choose Hillary. Author do not wants people to choose Hillary, and he tries to praise
Trump in comparison to Hillary. In 613 words of his tweets he has used approx 60 in appropriate words
like tornados, witch etc. That are not to be used. They are emotionally against the contender Hillary.
Also by some incidences author is trying to influence people against Hillary. He is trying to say that Train
accident may be was not an accident. These are some influencing tweets that author has done. Out

hypothesis concludes that due to these incidences shown by author and I most of the tweets he is trying
to influence people by his words. So clout value should be larger than an average value, for these
tweets. Clout value should be larger because at most of the places he is trying to make Hillary wrong,
without even her anything saying, like he said “will she do medical test”. By default he is trying to say
that she will not, even if she has not denied. This shows that he is just trying to make an impact of
negatives on peoples mind. Clout value should be greater.
SAMPLING
We are going to use random sampling technique to analysis the behavior of author and his emotional
tone. In this technique, each tweet has an equal chance of being chosen and analyzed. The entire
process is to be taken in consideration, in which each tweet will be selected independently of the other
tweets and then the conclusion will be taken out.
Random sampling technique is used to monitor the behavior of author and his emotional tone. We are
going to take every individual tweet in one time independent of other, so individual sample size will be
one. In this manner we will chose one by one each tweet from the left overs, and draw conclusions.
Conclusion and LIWC Result
From sampling technique, that is by analyzing the each tweet and studying it as done above in finding
our hypothesis, we see that author is strictly against the voting of Hillary. And uses very emotional
words.
For the sampling of LIWC, we are going to take the single step in sampling. Which means that our
sampling size will be 36. These are the number of tweets or retweets made by the author.
LIWC result-
On finding the LIWC result of the given tweets we get –

The clout value on twitter is 63.35. This shows that most of the time author has used influencing words
to influence people against Hillary. This value is more than the average social media values. Author has
continuously tried to warn people of the consequences if they choose to vote in favor of Hillary.
Our Hypothesis.
Our hypothesis is proved, as we have concluded that author is trying to influence people against their
voting for Hillary. LIWC results shows that author has used influence words as cloud count is greater
than an average value.