# Translating the Grievance Dictionary: a psychometric evaluation of Dutch, German, and Italian versions

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.07495 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07495/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 3 of its 17 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 May 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [The merits of Universal Language Model Fine-tuning for Small Datasets -- a case with Dutch book reviews](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.00896/) (2019)
- [The Grievance Dictionary: Understanding Threatening Language Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.04798/) (2020)
- [What Makes A Video Radicalizing? Identifying Sources of Influence in QAnon Videos](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.14616/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [From a Word-Level Dictionary to Sentence-Level Semantics: Multilingual Grievance Labelling with Contextual Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.20946/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper introduces and evaluates three translations of the Grievance Dictionary, a psycholinguistic dictionary for the analysis of violent, threatening or grievance-fuelled texts. Considering the relevance of these themes in languages beyond English, we translated the Grievance Dictionary to Dutch, German, and Italian. We describe the process of automated translation supplemented by human annotation. Psychometric analyses are performed, including internal reliability of dictionary categories and correlations with the LIWC dictionary. The Dutch and German translations perform similarly to the original English version, whereas the Italian dictionary shows low reliability for some categories. Finally, we make suggestions for further validation and application of the dictionary, as well as for future dictionary translations following a similar approach.