Christina Chance

Haniyeh Ehsani Oskouie, Christina Chance, Claire Huang et al.

Content moderation and toxicity classification represent critical tasks with significant social implications. However, studies have shown that major classification models exhibit tendencies to magnify or reduce biases and potentially overlook or disadvantage certain marginalized groups within their classification processes. Researchers suggest that the positionality of annotators influences the gold standard labels in which the models learned from propagate annotators' bias. To further investigate the impact of annotator positionality, we delve into fine-tuning BERTweet and HateBERT on the dataset while using topic-modeling strategies for content moderation. The results indicate that fine-tuning the models on specific topics results in a notable improvement in the F1 score of the models when compared to the predictions generated by other prominent classification models such as GPT-4, PerspectiveAPI, and RewireAPI. These findings further reveal that the state-of-the-art large language models exhibit significant limitations in accurately detecting and interpreting text toxicity contrasted with earlier methodologies. Code is available at https://github.com/aheldis/Toxicity-Classification.git.

Christina Chance, Rebecca Pattichis, Arjun Subramonian et al.

Reclaimed slur usage is a common and meaningful practice online for many marginalized communities. It serves as a source of solidarity, identity, and shared experience. However, contemporary automated and AI-based moderation tools for online content largely fail to distinguish between reclaimed and hateful uses of slurs, resulting in the suppression of marginalized voices. In this work, we use quantitative and qualitative methods to examine the attitudes of social media users in LGBTQIA+, Black, and women communities around reclaimed slurs targeting our focus groups including the f-word, n-word, and b-word. With social media users from these communities, we collect and analyze an annotated online slur usage corpus. The corpus includes annotators' perceptions of whether an online text containing a slur should be flagged as hate speech, as well as contextual features of the slur usage. Across all communities and annotation questions, we observe low inter-annotator agreement, indicating substantial disagreement among in-group annotators. This is compounded by the fact that, absent clear contextual signals of identity and intent, even in-group members may disagree on how to interpret reclaimed slur usage online. Semi-structured interviews with annotators suggest that differences in lived experience and personal history contribute to this variation as well. We find poor alignment between annotator judgments and automated hate speech assessments produced by Perspective API. We further observe that certain features of a text such as whether the slur usage was derogatory and if the slur was targeted at oneself are more associated with whether annotators report the text as hate speech. Together, these findings highlight the inherent subjectivity and contextual nature of how marginalized communities interpret slurs online.

Avalon Vinella, Margaret Capetz, Rebecca Pattichis et al.

In recent years, climate change repercussions have increasingly captured public interest. Consequently, corporations are emphasizing their environmental efforts in sustainability reports to bolster their public image. Yet, the absence of stringent regulations in review of such reports allows potential greenwashing. In this study, we introduce a novel preliminary methodology to train a language model on generated labels for greenwashing risk. Our primary contributions encompass: developing a preliminary mathematical formulation to quantify greenwashing risk, a fine-tuned ClimateBERT model for this problem, and a comparative analysis of results. On a test set comprising of sustainability reports, our best model achieved an average accuracy score of 86.34% and F1 score of 0.67, demonstrating that our proof-of-concept methodology shows a promising direction of exploration for this task.

Ashima Suvarna, Christina Chance, Karolina Naranjo et al.

Automatic toxic language detection is critical for creating safe, inclusive online spaces. However, it is a highly subjective task, with perceptions of toxic language shaped by community norms and lived experience. Existing toxicity detection models are typically trained on annotations that collapse diverse annotator perspectives into a single ground truth, erasing important context-specific notions of toxicity such as reclaimed language. To address this, we introduce MODELCITIZENS, a dataset of 6.8K social media posts and 40K toxicity annotations across diverse identity groups. To capture the role of conversational context on toxicity, typical of social media posts, we augment MODELCITIZENS posts with LLM-generated conversational scenarios. State-of-the-art toxicity detection tools (e.g. OpenAI Moderation API, GPT-o4-mini) underperform on MODELCITIZENS, with further degradation on context-augmented posts. Finally, we release LLAMACITIZEN-8B and GEMMACITIZEN-12B, LLaMA- and Gemma-based models finetuned on MODELCITIZENS, which outperform GPT-o4-mini by 5.5% on in-distribution evaluations. Our findings highlight the importance of community-informed annotation and modeling for inclusive content moderation. The data, models and code are available at https://github.com/asuvarna31/modelcitizens.

Christina Chance, Da Yin, Dakuo Wang et al.

In this paper, we study whether language models are affected by learned gender stereotypes during the comprehension of stories. Specifically, we investigate how models respond to gender stereotype perturbations through counterfactual data augmentation. Focusing on Question Answering (QA) tasks in fairytales, we modify the FairytaleQA dataset by swapping gendered character information and introducing counterfactual gender stereotypes during training. This allows us to assess model robustness and examine whether learned biases influence story comprehension. Our results show that models exhibit slight performance drops when faced with gender perturbations in the test set, indicating sensitivity to learned stereotypes. However, when fine-tuned on counterfactual training data, models become more robust to anti-stereotypical narratives. Additionally, we conduct a case study demonstrating how incorporating counterfactual anti-stereotype examples can improve inclusivity in downstream applications.

Rebecca Dorn, Christina Chance, Casandra Rusti et al.

Automated emotion detection is widely used in applications ranging from well-being monitoring to high-stakes domains like mental health and hiring. However, models often rely on annotations that reflect dominant cultural norms, limiting model ability to recognize emotional expression in dialects often excluded from training data distributions, such as African American Vernacular English (AAVE). This study examines emotion recognition model performance on AAVE compared to General American English (GAE). We analyze 2.7 million tweets geo-tagged within Los Angeles. Texts are scored for strength of AAVE using computational approximations of dialect features. Annotations of emotion presence and intensity are collected on a dataset of 875 tweets with both high and low AAVE densities. To assess model accuracy on a task as subjective as emotion perception, we calculate community-informed "silver" labels where AAVE-dense tweets are labeled by African American, AAVE-fluent (ingroup) annotators. On our labeled sample, GPT and BERT-based models exhibit false positive prediction rates of anger on AAVE more than double than on GAE. SpanEmo, a popular text-based emotion model, increases false positive rates of anger from 25 percent on GAE to 60 percent on AAVE. Additionally, a series of linear regressions reveals that models and non-ingroup annotations are significantly more correlated with profanity-based AAVE features than ingroup annotations. Linking Census tract demographics, we observe that neighborhoods with higher proportions of African American residents are associated with higher predictions of anger (Pearson's correlation r = 0.27) and lower joy (r = -0.10). These results find an emergent safety issue of emotion AI reinforcing racial stereotypes through biased emotion classification. We emphasize the need for culturally and dialect-informed affective computing systems.

Yixin Wan, Arjun Subramonian, Anaelia Ovalle et al. · meta-ai

The recent advancement of large and powerful models with Text-to-Image (T2I) generation abilities -- such as OpenAI's DALLE-3 and Google's Gemini -- enables users to generate high-quality images from textual prompts. However, it has become increasingly evident that even simple prompts could cause T2I models to exhibit conspicuous social bias in generated images. Such bias might lead to both allocational and representational harms in society, further marginalizing minority groups. Noting this problem, a large body of recent works has been dedicated to investigating different dimensions of bias in T2I systems. However, an extensive review of these studies is lacking, hindering a systematic understanding of current progress and research gaps. We present the first extensive survey on bias in T2I generative models. In this survey, we review prior studies on dimensions of bias: Gender, Skintone, and Geo-Culture. Specifically, we discuss how these works define, evaluate, and mitigate different aspects of bias. We found that: (1) while gender and skintone biases are widely studied, geo-cultural bias remains under-explored; (2) most works on gender and skintone bias investigated occupational association, while other aspects are less frequently studied; (3) almost all gender bias works overlook non-binary identities in their studies; (4) evaluation datasets and metrics are scattered, with no unified framework for measuring biases; and (5) current mitigation methods fail to resolve biases comprehensively. Based on current limitations, we point out future research directions that contribute to human-centric definitions, evaluations, and mitigation of biases. We hope to highlight the importance of studying biases in T2I systems, as well as encourage future efforts to holistically understand and tackle biases, building fair and trustworthy T2I technologies for everyone.