Lexical Semantic Change (LSC) provides insight into cultural and social dynamics. Yet, the validity of methods for measuring different kinds of LSC remains unestablished due to the absence of historical benchmark datasets. To address this gap, we propose LSC-Eval, a novel three-stage general-purpose evaluation framework to: (1) develop a scalable methodology for generating synthetic datasets that simulate theory-driven LSC using In-Context Learning and a lexical database; (2) use these datasets to evaluate the sensitivity of computational methods to synthetic change; and (3) assess their suitability for detecting change in specific dimensions and domains. We apply LSC-Eval to simulate changes along the Sentiment, Intensity, and Breadth (SIB) dimensions, as defined in the SIBling framework, using examples from psychology. We then evaluate the ability of selected methods to detect these controlled interventions. Our findings validate the use of synthetic benchmarks, demonstrate that tailored methods effectively detect changes along SIB dimensions, and reveal that a state-of-the-art LSC model faces challenges in detecting affective dimensions of LSC. LSC-Eval offers a valuable tool for dimension- and domain-specific benchmarking of LSC methods, with particular relevance to the social sciences.

Historical linguists have identified multiple forms of lexical semantic change. We present a three-dimensional framework for integrating these forms and a unified computational methodology for evaluating them concurrently. The dimensions represent increases or decreases in semantic 1) sentiment (valence of a target word’s collocates), 2) intensity (emotional arousal of collocates or the frequency of intensifiers), and 3) breadth (diversity of contexts in which the target word appears). These dimensions can be complemented by evaluation of shifts in the frequency of the target words and the thematic content of its collocates. This framework enables lexical semantic change to be mapped economically and systematically and has applications in computational social science. We present an illustrative analysis of semantic shifts in mental health and mental illness in two corpora, demonstrating patterns of semantic change that illuminate contemporary concerns about pathologization, stigma, and concept creep.

The present study evaluates semantic shifts in mental health-related concepts in two diachronic corpora spanning 1970-2016, one academic and one general. It evaluates whether their meanings have broadened to encompass less severe phenomena and whether they have become more pathology related. It applies a recently proposed methodology (Baes et al., 2023) to examine whether words collocating with a sample of mental health concepts have become less emotionally intense and develops a new way to examine whether the concepts increasingly co-occur with pathology-related terms. In support of the first hypothesis, mental health-related concepts became associated with less emotionally intense language in the psychology corpus (addiction, anger, stress, worry) and in the general corpus (addiction, grief, stress, worry). In support of the second hypothesis, mental health-related concepts came to be more associated with pathology-related language in psychology (addiction, grief, stress, worry) and in the general corpus (grief, stress). Findings demonstrate that some mental health concepts have become normalized and/or pathologized, a conclusion with important social and cultural implications.