Sentiment Analysis in Digital Spaces: An Overview of Reviews

Digital data generated via social media have become a prosperous entity for sentiment analysis researchers seeking to understand individuals’ feelings, attitudes, and emotions. Numerous systematic reviews have synthesized work across diverse contexts, media, methods, and applications; however they rarely address the validity of sentiment analysis methods or critically examine scientific practices. Our overview of 66 reviews comprises 3,131 unique primary studies using sentiment analysis to dissect online digital data. We provide a high-level overview of current applications, methods, outcomes, and common challenges in sentiment analysis research. A bespoke risk of reporting bias (RoRB) framework was designed to assess the transparency, completeness, and consistency of reporting practices within the included systematic reviews, with particular attention to methodological clarity and adherence to reporting standards. We found diverse applications, methods, outcomes, and persistent challenges outlined in the reviews, which we discuss in relation to the validity of sentiment analysis research. Importantly, reporting practices across the reviews were limited or inconsistent, a concern we examine by considering how existing systematic reviews shape understanding of the field and influence subsequent decisions by researchers and practitioners. We also outline how future research can address these issues and highlight their importance across numerous societal applications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Computing Surveys
Published
2026-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3842380
Primary Topic
Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sentiment Analysis in Digital Spaces: An Overview of Reviews

Joanne Hinds, Brittany I Davidson, Laura Eeva Maria Ayravainen
ACM Computing Surveys
Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
article

Sentiment Analysis in Digital Spaces: An Overview of Reviews

Joanne Hinds, Brittany I Davidson, Laura Eeva Maria Ayravainen
article en

Abstract

Digital data generated via social media have become a prosperous entity for sentiment analysis researchers seeking to understand individuals’ feelings, attitudes, and emotions. Numerous systematic reviews have synthesized work across diverse contexts, media, methods, and applications; however they rarely address the validity of sentiment analysis methods or critically examine scientific practices. Our overview of 66 reviews comprises 3,131 unique primary studies using sentiment analysis to dissect online digital data. We provide a high-level overview of current applications, methods, outcomes, and common challenges in sentiment analysis research. A bespoke risk of reporting bias (RoRB) framework was designed to assess the transparency, completeness, and consistency of reporting practices within the included systematic reviews, with particular attention to methodological clarity and adherence to reporting standards. We found diverse applications, methods, outcomes, and persistent challenges outlined in the reviews, which we discuss in relation to the validity of sentiment analysis research. Importantly, reporting practices across the reviews were limited or inconsistent, a concern we examine by considering how existing systematic reviews shape understanding of the field and influence subsequent decisions by researchers and practitioners. We also outline how future research can address these issues and highlight their importance across numerous societal applications.

ACM Computing Surveys
University of Bath (GB)
Government of the United Kingdom
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 100%
Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.