Unsupervised User Stance Detection on Twitter

We present a highly effective unsupervised framework for detecting the stance of prolific Twitter users with respect to controversial topics. In particular, we use dimensionality reduction to project users onto a low-dimensional space, followed by clustering, which allows us to find core users that are representative of the different stances. Our framework has three major advantages over pre-existing methods, which are based on supervised or semi-supervised classification. First, we do not require any prior labeling of users: instead, we create clusters, which are much easier to label manually afterwards, e.g., in a matter of seconds or minutes instead of hours. Second, there is no need for domain- or topic-level knowledge either to specify the relevant stances (labels) or to conduct the actual labeling. Third, our framework is robust in the face of data skewness, e.g., when some users or some stances have greater representation in the data. We experiment with different combinations of user similarity features, dataset sizes, dimensionality reduction methods, and clustering algorithms to ascertain the most effective and most computationally efficient combinations across three different datasets (in English and Turkish). We further verified our results on additional tweet sets covering six different controversial topics. Our best combination in terms of effectiveness and efficiency uses retweeted accounts as features, UMAP for dimensionality reduction, and Mean Shift for clustering, and yields a small number of high-quality user clusters, typically just 2--3, with more than 98\% purity. The resulting user clusters can be used to train downstream classifiers. Moreover, our framework is robust to variations in the hyper-parameter values and also with respect to random initialization

Fast Few shot Self-attentive Semi-supervised Political Inclination Prediction

With the rising participation of the common mass in social media, it is increasingly common now for policymakers/journalists to create online polls on social media to understand the political leanings of people in specific locations. The caveat here is that only influential people can make such an online polling and reach out at a mass scale. Further, in such cases, the distribution of voters is not controllable and may be, in fact, biased. On the other hand,if we can interpret the publicly available data over social media to probe the political inclination of users, we will be able to have controllable insights about the survey population, keep the cost of survey low and also collect publicly available data without involving the concerned persons. Hence we introduce a self-attentive semi-supervised framework for political inclination detection to further that objective. The advantage of our model is that it neither needs huge training data nor does it need to store social network parameters. Nevertheless, it achieves an accuracy of 93.7\% with no annotated data; further, with only a few annotated examples per class it achieves competitive performance. We found that the model is highly efficient even in resource-constrained settings, and insights drawn from its predictions match the manual survey outcomes when applied to diverse real-life scenarios.Comment: Accepted to ICADL'2

Data science methods for the analysis of controversial social dedia discussions

Social media communities like Reddit and Twitter allow users to express their views on topics of their interest, and to engage with other users who may share or oppose these views. This can lead to productive discussions towards a consensus, or to contended debates, where disagreements frequently arise. Prior work on such settings has primarily focused on identifying notable instances of antisocial behavior such as hate-speech and “trolling”, which represent possible threats to the health of a community. These, however, are exceptionally severe phenomena, and do not encompass controversies stemming from user debates, differences of opinions, and off-topic content, all of which can naturally come up in a discussion without going so far as to compromise its development. This dissertation proposes a framework for the systematic analysis of social media discussions that take place in the presence of controversial themes, disagreements, and mixed opinions from participating users. For this, we develop a feature-based model to describe key elements of a discussion, such as its salient topics, the level of activity from users, the sentiments it expresses, and the user feedback it receives. Initially, we build our feature model to characterize adversarial discussions surrounding political campaigns on Twitter, with a focus on the factual and sentimental nature of their topics and the role played by different users involved. We then extend our approach to Reddit discussions, leveraging community feedback signals to define a new notion of controversy and to highlight conversational archetypes that arise from frequent and interesting interaction patterns. We use our feature model to build logistic regression classifiers that can predict future instances of controversy in Reddit communities centered on politics, world news, sports, and personal relationships. Finally, our model also provides the basis for a comparison of different communities in the health domain, where topics and activity vary considerably despite their shared overall focus. In each of these cases, our framework provides insight into how user behavior can shape a community’s individual definition of controversy and its overall identity.Social-Media Communities wie Reddit und Twitter ermöglichen es Nutzern, ihre Ansichten zu eigenen Themen zu äußern und mit anderen Nutzern in Kontakt zu treten, die diese Ansichten teilen oder ablehnen. Dies kann zu produktiven Diskussionen mit einer Konsensbildung führen oder zu strittigen Auseinandersetzungen über auftretende Meinungsverschiedenheiten. Frühere Arbeiten zu diesem Komplex konzentrierten sich in erster Linie darauf, besondere Fälle von asozialem Verhalten wie Hassrede und "Trolling" zu identifizieren, da diese eine Gefahr für die Gesprächskultur und den Wert einer Community darstellen. Die sind jedoch außergewöhnlich schwerwiegende Phänomene, die keinesfalls bei jeder Kontroverse auftreten die sich aus einfachen Diskussionen, Meinungsverschiedenheiten und themenfremden Inhalten ergeben. All diese Reibungspunkte können auch ganz natürlich in einer Diskussion auftauchen, ohne dass diese gleich den ganzen Gesprächsverlauf gefährden. Diese Dissertation stellt ein Framework für die systematische Analyse von Social-Media Diskussionen vor, die vornehmlich von kontroversen Themen, strittigen Standpunkten und Meinungsverschiedenheiten der teilnehmenden Nutzer geprägt sind. Dazu entwickeln wir ein Feature-Modell, um Schlüsselelemente einer Diskussion zu beschreiben. Dazu zählen der Aktivitätsgrad der Benutzer, die Wichtigkeit der einzelnen Aspekte, die Stimmung, die sie ausdrückt, und das Benutzerfeedback. Zunächst bauen wir unser Feature-Modell so auf, um bei Diskussionen gegensätzlicher politischer Kampagnen auf Twitter die oben genannten Schlüsselelemente zu bestimmen. Der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf den sachlichen und emotionalen Aspekten der Themen im Bezug auf die Rollen verschiedener Nutzer. Anschließend erweitern wir unseren Ansatz auf Reddit-Diskussionen und nutzen das Community-Feedback, um einen neuen Begriff der Kontroverse zu definieren und Konversationsarchetypen hervorzuheben, die sich aus Interaktionsmustern ergeben. Wir nutzen unser Feature-Modell, um ein Logistischer Regression Verfahren zu entwickeln, das zukünftige Kontroversen in Reddit-Communities in den Themenbereichen Politik, Weltnachrichten, Sport und persönliche Beziehungen vorhersagen kann. Schlussendlich bietet unser Modell auch die Grundlage für eine Vergleichbarkeit verschiedener Communities im Gesundheitsbereich, auch wenn dort die Themen und die Nutzeraktivität, trotz des gemeinsamen Gesamtfokus, erheblich variieren. In jedem der genannten Themenbereiche gibt unser Framework Erkenntnisgewinne, wie das Verhalten der Nutzer die spezifisch Definition von Kontroversen der Community prägt

Evolving linguistic divergence on polarizing social media

Language change is influenced by many factors, but often starts from synchronic variation, where multiple linguistic patterns or forms coexist, or where different speech communities use language in increasingly different ways. Besides regional or economic reasons, communities may form and segregate based on political alignment. The latter, referred to as political polarization, is of growing societal concern across the world. Here we map and quantify linguistic divergence across the partisan left-right divide in the United States, using social media data. We develop a general methodology to delineate (social) media users by their political preference, based on which (potentially biased) news media accounts they do and do not follow on a given platform. Our data consists of 1.5M short posts by 10k users (about 20M words) from the social media platform Twitter (now "X"). Delineating this sample involved mining the platform for the lists of followers (n=422M) of 72 large news media accounts. We quantify divergence in topics of conversation and word frequencies, messaging sentiment, and lexical semantics of words and emoji. We find signs of linguistic divergence across all these aspects, especially in topics and themes of conversation, in line with previous research. While US American English remains largely intelligible within its large speech community, our findings point at areas where miscommunication may eventually arise given ongoing polarization and therefore potential linguistic divergence. Our methodology - combining data mining, lexicostatistics, machine learning, large language models and a systematic human annotation approach - is largely language and platform agnostic. In other words, while we focus here on US political divides and US English, the same approach is applicable to other countries, languages, and social media platforms