Frequencies
Frequencies
Embedded Files
There are 76,445 occurences of Access in the HE corpus.
Distribution by Region
Distribution by Region
Distribution by Organisation Type, Document Type, Region and Year
Distribution by Organisation Type, Document Type, Region and Year
Click here to enlarge and for more details
Refresh the website if the graphics are not shownAccess occurs mostly in documents published in Europe, followed by North America, Asia, Africa and MENA with comparatively smaller contributions. Overall, the top five contributors in terms of occurrences are IGO, NGO, NGO_Fed, RC and State organisations.
Occurrences from IGO were mostly obtained from general documents published in Europe . NGO, NGO_Fed, RC and State documents provide the greatest number of occurrences, primarily from activity reports published in Europe.
Definitions
Definitions
Summary of Definitional Elements
Summary of Definitional Elements
Abstracted from definitions and related concepts. Please scroll down for more details.
Definitional Contexts
Definitional Contexts
Related Concepts
Related Concepts
Frequent Collocations
Frequent Collocations
Frequent words that accompany a term are known as collocates. A given term and its collocates form collocations. These can be extracted automatically based on statistics and curated manually to explore interactions with concepts.
Comparisons over time between organisation types with the greatest number of hits (IGO, NGO, NGO_Fed, RC and State organisations) may prove to be meaningful. Below is an histogram for the top yearly collocation for each of the five organisations with the greatest contribution as well as across all organisation types.
Collocates Over Time
Collocates Over Time
Collocational data for Access was found to be scarce. Across all 5 organisation types analysed, only 6 top collocates were obtained:
drinking (from drinking water);
universal;
safe;
internet;
safer; and
drinking-water
IGO documents generated universal as top collocate in 2008. Other top IGO collocates are internet and drinking-water.
NGO documents generated equal as top collocate in 2015 with the highest overall score. Other top NGO collocates include drinking and deny.
NGO_Fed documents generated MSM (men who have sex with men) as top collocate in 2006 obtaining the highest overall score. Other top NGO collocates include healthcare and clean.
RC documents only generated safer as top collocate in 2016.
Lastly, State documents generated logical as top collocate in 2006. Other State top collocates are first-time, unfettered and drinking.
Unique Collocates by Organisation Type
Unique Collocates by Organisation Type
Organisation subcorpora present unique and shared collocations with other organisation types. Unique collocations allow to discover what a particular organisation type says about Access that others do not.
IGO documents feature the following unique collocates: webpage, telephone, PHP (Public Health Promotion), drinking-water, logistic, mortgage, OCHA ( Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs), firm, telecommunication and sewerage.
All NGO unique collocates are Ecuador, Thailand, auditor, scarce, GHAP (Global Health Access Program), oxygen, Israel, director, Burma and spark.
NGO_Fed documents contain the following unique collocates: MSF (Médecins Sans Frontières), RAMQ (Quebec's health insurance board ) , toy, empowering, attendance, viral, malnourished, age-friendly, doubling and life-changing.
Documents from RC generated safer, ICRC(Iraqui Christian Relief Council), inmate, violence-affected, proximity, IRCS (Islamic Republic of Iran), detain, apply, formalize and wounded.
State documents generated education-vocational, evolution, amber, moderate, educationvocational, electric, cellular, logical, priok ( district of North Jakarta, Indonesia) and competitively-priced.
Shared Collocates by Organisation Type
Shared Collocates by Organisation Type
Shared collocations allow to discover matching elements with organisations who discuss Access. These constitute intersections between subcorpora.
Top collocates shared by 2 organisation types are:
detainee (RC + NGO)
october (NGO + IGO)
quota-free (State + IGO)
duty-free (State + IGO)
remedy (NGO + IGO)
index (NGO + IGO)
court (NGO + IGO)
tenure (NGO + IGO)
empowerment (NGO + IGO)
stability (RC + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 3 organisation types are:
asylum (RC + NGO + IGO)
april (RC + NGO + IGO)
obstacle (NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
march (NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
february (RC + NGO + IGO)
august (RC + NGO + IGO)
contraceptive (State + NGO + IGO)
demand (NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
IDP (RC + NGO + IGO)
broadband (State + RC + IGO)
health-care (RC + NGO + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 4 organisation types are:
justice (State + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
little (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
denial (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
hinder (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
modern (State + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
victim (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
vocational (State + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
struggle (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
antiretroviral (State + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
hamper (RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
Top collocates shared by 5 organisation types are:
safe (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
clean (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
water (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
improve (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
basic (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
gain (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
lack (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
service (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
quality (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
equal (State + RC + NGO_Fed + NGO + IGO)
Usage Over Time
Usage Over Time
HE Corpus
HE Corpus
The chart below represents the distribution of Access between 2005 and 2019 in terms of the number of occurrences and relative frequency of occurrences. It also allows you to view the distribution across Regions, Organisations and Document types.
What's the relative frequency of a concept?
What's the relative frequency of a concept?
The relative frequency of a concept compares its occurrences in a specific subcorpora (i.e. Year, Region, Organisation Type, Document Type) to its total number of occurrences in the entire HE corpus. This indicates how typical a word is to a specific subcorpus and allows to draw tentative comparisons between subcorpora, e.g. Europe vs Asia or NGO vs IGO. You can read these relative frequencies as follows:
Relative frequency is expressed as a percentage, above or below the total number of occurrences, which are set at 100%. This measure is obtained by dividing the number of occurrences by the relative size of a particular subcorpus.
Under 100%: a word is less frequent in a subcorpus than in the entire corpus. This is means that the word is not typical or specific to a given subcorpus.
100%: a word is as frequent in a subcorpus as it is in the entire corpus.
Over 100%: a word is more frequent in a subcorpus than in the entire corpus. This means that the word in question is typical or specific to a given subcorpus.
As an author, you may be interested in exploring why a concept appears more or less frequently in a given subcorpus. This may be related to the concept's nature, the way humanitarians in a given year, region, organisation type or document type use the concept, or the specific documents in the corpus and subcorpora itself. To manually explore the original corpus data, you can consult each Contexts section where available or the search the corpus itself if needs be.
Occurrences of Access were highest in 2016. However, it obtains the highest relative frequency recorded in 2019 (139 %).
Europe generated the greatest number of occurrences and North America generated the highest relative frequency with 99%.
The top 5 organisation types with the highest relative frequency of access are Project, WHS, IGO, NGO_Fed and RC.
Activity reports provided the greatest number of occurrences and general documents generated the highest relative frequency with 120 %.
Google Ngram Viewer
Google Ngram Viewer
This shows the evolution of Access and in the vast Google Books corpus, which gives you a general idea of the trajectory of the term in English books between 1950 and 2019. Values are expressed as a percentage of the total corpus instead of occurrences.
Please note that this is not a domain-specific corpus. However, it provides a general overview of and its evolution across domains.
Access increases progressively until it hits its peak in 2001. From then onwards it starts to decrease.
Debates & Controversies
Debates & Controversies
Synonyms
Synonyms
Discussion
Discussion
You can add your feedback on this LAR and say whether you need us to expand the information on any section by filling in a brief form.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse