CLMay 12, 2020
Intersectional Bias in Hate Speech and Abusive Language DatasetsJae Yeon Kim, Carlos Ortiz, Sarah Nam et al.
Algorithms are widely applied to detect hate speech and abusive language in social media. We investigated whether the human-annotated data used to train these algorithms are biased. We utilized a publicly available annotated Twitter dataset (Founta et al. 2018) and classified the racial, gender, and party identification dimensions of 99,996 tweets. The results showed that African American tweets were up to 3.7 times more likely to be labeled as abusive, and African American male tweets were up to 77% more likely to be labeled as hateful compared to the others. These patterns were statistically significant and robust even when party identification was added as a control variable. This study provides the first systematic evidence on intersectional bias in datasets of hate speech and abusive language.
HCSep 24, 2018
Empirical Methodology for Crowdsourcing Ground TruthAnca Dumitrache, Oana Inel, Benjamin Timmermans et al.
The process of gathering ground truth data through human annotation is a major bottleneck in the use of information extraction methods for populating the Semantic Web. Crowdsourcing-based approaches are gaining popularity in the attempt to solve the issues related to volume of data and lack of annotators. Typically these practices use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in many domains, such as event detection, there is ambiguity in the data, as well as a multitude of perspectives of the information examples. We present an empirically derived methodology for efficiently gathering of ground truth data in a diverse set of use cases covering a variety of domains and annotation tasks. Central to our approach is the use of CrowdTruth metrics that capture inter-annotator disagreement. We show that measuring disagreement is essential for acquiring a high quality ground truth. We achieve this by comparing the quality of the data aggregated with CrowdTruth metrics with majority vote, over a set of diverse crowdsourcing tasks: Medical Relation Extraction, Twitter Event Identification, News Event Extraction and Sound Interpretation. We also show that an increased number of crowd workers leads to growth and stabilization in the quality of annotations, going against the usual practice of employing a small number of annotators.