REVIEW 1 cited by
Abuse is Contextual, What about NLP? The Role of Context in Abusive Language Annotation and Detection
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
Abuse is Contextual, What about NLP? The Role of Context in Abusive Language Annotation and Detection
read the original abstract
The datasets most widely used for abusive language detection contain lists of messages, usually tweets, that have been manually judged as abusive or not by one or more annotators, with the annotation performed at message level. In this paper, we investigate what happens when the hateful content of a message is judged also based on the context, given that messages are often ambiguous and need to be interpreted in the context of occurrence. We first re-annotate part of a widely used dataset for abusive language detection in English in two conditions, i.e. with and without context. Then, we compare the performance of three classification algorithms obtained on these two types of dataset, arguing that a context-aware classification is more challenging but also more similar to a real application scenario.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Toxicity Detection Should Measure Contextual Harm, Not Text-Intrinsic Badness
Toxicity detection should shift from single-label text classification to measuring contextual communicative harm via the Contextual Stress Framework, which ties norm violation to induced stress.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.