ReviewNeural computing & applications2023
A systematic review of machine learning techniques for stance detection and its applications.
Review in Neural computing & applications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using N400 Event-Related Potential to Detect Differences in Design-Mode and Belief-Mode Scaffold Use.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Leveraging complex network features improves vaccine stance classification.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Political expression of academics on Twitter.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Promises and pitfalls of using LLMs to identify actor stances in political discourse.PloS one · 2025Article
- Use of large language models as a scalable approach to understanding public health discourse.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stance detection is an evolving opinion mining research area motivated by the vast increase in the variety and volume of user-generated content. In this regard, considerable research has been recently carried out in the area of stance detection. In this study, we review the different techniques proposed in the literature for stance detection as well as other applications such as rumor veracity detection. Particularly, we conducted a systematic literature review of empirical research on the machine learning (ML) models for stance detection that were published from January 2015 to October 2022. We analyzed 96 primary studies, which spanned eight categories of ML techniques. In this paper, we categorize the analyzed studies according to a taxonomy of six dimensions: approaches, target dependency, applications, modeling, language, and resources. We further classify and analyze the corresponding techniques from each dimension's perspective and highlight their strengths and weaknesses. The analysis reveals that deep learning models that adopt a mechanism of self-attention have been used more frequently than the other approaches. It is worth noting that emerging ML techniques such as few-shot learning and multitask learning have been used extensively for stance detection. A major conclusion of our analysis is that despite that ML models have shown to be promising in this field, the application of these models in the real world is still limited. Our analysis lists challenges and gaps to be addressed in future research. Furthermore, the taxonomy presented can assist researchers in developing and positioning new techniques for stance detection-related applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.