Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37346317›Full record

ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2022

Addressing religious hate online: from taxonomy creation to automated detection.

Alan Ramponi, Benedetta Testa, Sara Tonelli, Elisabetta Jezek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Alan RamponiFondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy.
Benedetta TestaDipartimento di Studi Umanistici, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Sara TonelliFondazione Bruno Kessler, Trento, Italy.
Elisabetta JezekDipartimento di Studi Umanistici, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abusive language in online social media is a pervasive and harmful phenomenon which calls for automatic computational approaches to be successfully contained. Previous studies have introduced corpora and natural language processing approaches for specific kinds of online abuse, mainly focusing on misogyny and racism. A current underexplored area in this context is religious hate, for which efforts in data and methods to date have been rather scattered. This is exacerbated by different annotation schemes that available datasets use, which inevitably lead to poor repurposing of data in wider contexts. Furthermore, religious hate is very much dependent on country-specific factors, including the presence and visibility of religious minorities, societal issues, historical background, and current political decisions. Motivated by the lack of annotated data specifically tailoring religion and the poor interoperability of current datasets, in this article we propose a fine-grained labeling scheme for religious hate speech detection. Such scheme lies on a wider and highly-interoperable taxonomy of abusive language, and covers the three main monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Moreover, we introduce a Twitter dataset in two languages-English and Italian-that has been annotated following the proposed annotation scheme. We experiment with several classification algorithms on the annotated dataset, from traditional machine learning classifiers to recent transformer-based language models, assessing the difficulty of two tasks: abusive language detection and religious hate speech detection. Finally, we investigate the cross-lingual transferability of multilingual models on the tasks, shedding light on the viability of repurposing our dataset for religious hate speech detection on low-resource languages. We release the annotated data and publicly distribute the code for our classification experiments at https://github.com/dhfbk/religious-hate-speech.

Indexed as

Abusive language detectionNatural language processingReligious hate speech detection

Identifiers

PMID37346317
PMCPMC10280248

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.