Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Identifying Morality Frames in Political Tweets using Relational Learning

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.04535 v1 pith:7YISWRDX submitted 2021-09-09 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CYcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CYcs.LG
keywords moralentitiessentimentattitudesfoundationsframeslearningmorality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Extracting moral sentiment from text is a vital component in understanding public opinion, social movements, and policy decisions. The Moral Foundation Theory identifies five moral foundations, each associated with a positive and negative polarity. However, moral sentiment is often motivated by its targets, which can correspond to individuals or collective entities. In this paper, we introduce morality frames, a representation framework for organizing moral attitudes directed at different entities, and come up with a novel and high-quality annotated dataset of tweets written by US politicians. Then, we propose a relational learning model to predict moral attitudes towards entities and moral foundations jointly. We do qualitative and quantitative evaluations, showing that moral sentiment towards entities differs highly across political ideologies.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Beyond Dataset Creation: Critical View of Annotation Variation and Bias Probing of a Dataset for Online Radical Content Detection

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new multilingual radical-content dataset plus an analysis showing that annotation disagreement and socio-demographic factors shift model performance and bias metrics.

Pith tools