Table 5. Keyword loss of specificity ISP... | Emerald Publishing

Table 5.

Keyword loss of specificity

ISP	Aldrig (never) (%)	Behöver (need) (%)	Bör (should) (%)	Ej (not) (%)	Förbjuden (forbidden) (%)	Inte (not) (%)	Måste (must) (%)	Ska (shall) (%)	Skall (shall)
1	–	33	–	–	–	12	–	33	0
2	0	–	–	25	–	25	–	47	57
3	–	–	67	67	–	100	50	75	36
4	0	–	25	50	–	46	67	100	46
5	–	100	–	–	–	100	100	73	–
6	–	–	33	–	–	22	–	56	–
7	–	100	–	–	–	86	–	92	100
8	100	60	40	–	–	87	93	90	–
9	–	–	0	100	0	55	0	89	40
10	–	–	–	–	–	92	100	88	–
11	–	–	0	–	–	68	100	65	–
12	–	–	100	–	–	75	100	65	–
13	–	100	–	–	–	100	0	88	100
14	–	50	–	–	100	40	33	62	–
15	–	100	0	–	–	33	100	84	–
Sum^*	40	64	40	62	50	57	79	76	43

ISP	Aldrig(never) (%)	Behöver(need) (%)	Bör(should) (%)	Ej(not) (%)	Förbjuden(forbidden) (%)	Inte(not) (%)	Måste(must) (%)	Ska(shall) (%)	Skall(shall)
1	–	33	–	–	–	12	–	33	0
2	0	–	–	25	–	25	–	47	57
3	–	–	67	67	–	100	50	75	36
4	0	–	25	50	–	46	67	100	46
5	–	100	–	–	–	100	100	73	–
6	–	–	33	–	–	22	–	56	–
7	–	100	–	–	–	86	–	92	100
8	100	60	40	–	–	87	93	90	–
9	–	–	0	100	0	55	0	89	40
10	–	–	–	–	–	92	100	88	–
11	–	–	0	–	–	68	100	65	–
12	–	–	100	–	–	75	100	65	–
13	–	100	–	–	–	100	0	88	100
14	–	50	–	–	100	40	33	62	–
15	–	100	0	–	–	33	100	84	–
Sum^*	40	64	40	62	50	57	79	76	43

Note:

*

Please note that the sum is calculated using the sums in Tables 3 and 4

Source: Created by authors