Stance Classification for Rumour Analysis in Twitter: Exploiting Affective Information and Conversation Structure

Analysing how people react to rumours associated with news in social media is an important task to prevent the spreading of misinformation, which is nowadays widely recognized as a dangerous tendency. In social media conversations, users show different stances and attitudes towards rumourous stories. Some users take a definite stance, supporting or denying the rumour at issue, while others just comment it, or ask for additional evidence related to the veracity of the rumour. On this line, a new shared task has been proposed at SemEval-2017 (Task 8, SubTask A), which is focused on rumour stance classification in English tweets. The goal is predicting user stance towards emerging rumours in Twitter, in terms of supporting, denying, querying, or commenting the original rumour, looking at the conversation threads originated by the rumour. This paper describes a new approach to this task, where the use of conversation-based and affective-based features, covering different facets of affect, has been explored. Our classification model outperforms the best-performing systems for stance classification at SemEval-2017 Task 8, showing the effectiveness of the feature set proposed.

[1]  Carlo Strapparava,et al.  The Role of Affect Analysis in Dialogue Act Identification , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing.

[2]  Saif Mohammad,et al.  CROWDSOURCING A WORD–EMOTION ASSOCIATION LEXICON , 2013, Comput. Intell..

[3]  R. Procter,et al.  Reading the riots on Twitter: methodological innovation for the analysis of big data , 2013 .

[4]  Saif Mohammad,et al.  SemEval-2016 Task 6: Detecting Stance in Tweets , 2016, *SEMEVAL.

[5]  Dipankar Das,et al.  Enhanced SenticNet with Affective Labels for Concept-Based Opinion Mining , 2013, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[6]  P. Wilson,et al.  The Nature of Emotions , 2012 .

[7]  Arkaitz Zubiaga,et al.  SemEval-2017 Task 8: RumourEval: Determining rumour veracity and support for rumours , 2017, *SEMEVAL.

[8]  B. Hayes The American Scientist , 1962, Nature.

[9]  Arkaitz Zubiaga,et al.  Towards Detecting Rumours in Social Media , 2015, AAAI Workshop: AI for Cities.

[10]  Sinan Aral,et al.  The spread of true and false news online , 2018, Science.

[11]  Arkaitz Zubiaga,et al.  Analysing How People Orient to and Spread Rumours in Social Media by Looking at Conversational Threads , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  Suhang Wang,et al.  Fake News Detection on Social Media: A Data Mining Perspective , 2017, SKDD.

[13]  P. Ekman An argument for basic emotions , 1992 .

[14]  M. Bradley,et al.  Affective Norms for English Words (ANEW): Instruction Manual and Affective Ratings , 1999 .

[15]  C. Whissell Using the Revised Dictionary of Affect in Language to Quantify the Emotional Undertones of Samples of Natural Language , 2009, Psychological reports.

[16]  Kalina Bontcheva,et al.  Simple Open Stance Classification for Rumour Analysis , 2017, RANLP.

[17]  Erik Cambria,et al.  SenticNet 3: A Common and Common-Sense Knowledge Base for Cognition-Driven Sentiment Analysis , 2014, AAAI.

[18]  L. Christophorou Science , 2018, Emerging Dynamics: Science, Energy, Society and Values.

[19]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[20]  Paolo Rosso,et al.  Friends and Enemies of Clinton and Trump: Using Context for Detecting Stance in Political Tweets , 2016, MICAI.

[21]  Isabelle Augenstein,et al.  Turing at SemEval-2017 Task 8: Sequential Approach to Rumour Stance Classification with Branch-LSTM , 2017, *SEMEVAL.

[22]  David Graf SemEval-2017-T8 , 2017 .

[23]  Michael J. Barnes,et al.  Psychological Reports , 2015, Psychological reports.