Annotating Hate Speech: Three Schemes at Comparison

Annotated data are essential to train and benchmark NLP systems. The reliability of the annotation, i.e. low interannotator disagreement, is a key factor, especially when dealing with highly subjective phenomena occurring in human language. Hate speech (HS), in particular, is intrinsically nuanced and hard to fit in any fixed scale, therefore crisp classification schemes for its annotation often show their limits. We test three annotation schemes on a corpus of HS, in order to produce more reliable data. While rating scales and best-worst-scaling are more expensive strategies for annotation, our experimental results suggest that they are worth implementing in a HS detection perspective.1

[1]  Torsten Zesch,et al.  Do Women Perceive Hate Differently: Examining the Relationship Between Hate Speech, Gender, and Agreement Judgments , 2018, KONVENS.

[2]  Felice Dell'Orletta,et al.  Hate Me, Hate Me Not: Hate Speech Detection on Facebook , 2017, ITASEC.

[3]  Joel R. Tetreault,et al.  Abusive Language Detection in Online User Content , 2016, WWW.

[4]  Saif Mohammad,et al.  Best-Worst Scaling More Reliable than Rating Scales: A Case Study on Sentiment Intensity Annotation , 2017, ACL.

[5]  Ramit Sawhney,et al.  Detecting Offensive Tweets in Hindi-English Code-Switched Language , 2018, SocialNLP@ACL.

[6]  Cristina Bosco,et al.  Hate Speech Annotation: Analysis of an Italian Twitter Corpus , 2017, CLiC-it.

[7]  Ika Alfina,et al.  Hate speech detection in the Indonesian language: A dataset and preliminary study , 2017, 2017 International Conference on Advanced Computer Science and Information Systems (ICACSIS).

[8]  Tomaz Erjavec,et al.  Legal Framework, Dataset and Annotation Schema for Socially Unacceptable Online Discourse Practices in Slovene , 2017, ALW@ACL.

[9]  Cristina Bosco,et al.  An Impossible Dialogue! Nominal Utterances and Populist Rhetoric in an Italian Twitter Corpus of Hate Speech against Immigrants , 2018, LREC.

[10]  R. Likert “Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes, A” , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[11]  Rishab Nithyanand,et al.  Measuring Offensive Speech in Online Political Discourse , 2017, FOCI @ USENIX Security Symposium.

[12]  Saif Mohammad,et al.  Understanding Emotions: A Dataset of Tweets to Study Interactions between Affect Categories , 2018, LREC.

[13]  Zeerak Waseem,et al.  Are You a Racist or Am I Seeing Things? Annotator Influence on Hate Speech Detection on Twitter , 2016, NLP+CSS@EMNLP.

[14]  Kush R. Varshney,et al.  The Effect of Extremist Violence on Hateful Speech Online , 2018, ICWSM.

[15]  Hugo Lewi Hammer,et al.  Automatic Detection of Hateful Comments in Online Discussion , 2016, INISCOM.

[16]  Walid Magdy,et al.  Abusive Language Detection on Arabic Social Media , 2017, ALW@ACL.

[17]  Ingmar Weber,et al.  Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language , 2017, ICWSM.

[18]  Matthew Leighton Williams,et al.  Cyber Hate Speech on Twitter: An Application of Machine Classification and Statistical Modeling for Policy and Decision Making , 2015 .

[19]  Carlos Busso,et al.  The Ordinal Nature of Emotions: An Emerging Approach , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing.

[20]  Njagi Dennis Gitari,et al.  A Lexicon-based Approach for Hate Speech Detection , 2015, MUE 2015.

[21]  Lei Gao,et al.  Recognizing Explicit and Implicit Hate Speech Using a Weakly Supervised Two-path Bootstrapping Approach , 2017, IJCNLP.