“Don’t discuss”: Investigating Semantic and Argumentative Features for Supervised Propagandist Message Detection and Classification
One of the mechanisms through which disinformation is spreading online, in particular through social media, is by employing propaganda techniques. These include specific rhetorical and psychological strategies, ranging from leveraging on emotions to exploiting logical fallacies. In this paper, our goal is to push forward research on propaganda detection based on text analysis, given the crucial role these methods may play to address this main societal issue. More precisely, we propose a supervised approach to classify textual snippets both as propaganda messages and according to the precise applied propaganda technique, as well as a detailed linguistic analysis of the features characterising propaganda information in text (e.g., semantic, sentiment and argumentation features). Extensive experiments conducted on two available propagandist resources (i.e., NLP4IF’19 and SemEval’20-Task 11 datasets) show that the proposed approach, leveraging different language models and the investigated linguistic features, achieves very promising results on propaganda classification, both at sentence- and at fragment-level.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Logical FallaciesPropaganda detectionSentenceSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Implicit Knowledge in Argumentative Texts: An Annotated Corpus
When speaking or writing, people omit information that seems clear and evident, such that only part of the message is expressed in words. Especially in argumentative texts it is very common that (important) parts of the …
Corpus for Modeling User Interactions in Online Persuasive Discussions
Persuasions are common in online arguments such as discussion forums. To analyze persuasive strategies, it is important to understand how individuals construct posts and comments based on the semantics of the argumentati…
Argument MiningPersuasivenessFrom Argument Search to Argumentative Dialogue: A Topic-independent Approach to Argument Acquisition for Dialogue Systems
Despite the remarkable progress in the field of computational argumentation, dialogue systems concerned with argumentative tasks often rely on structured knowledge about arguments and their relations. Since the manual ac…
Relation ClassificationClassifying Argumentative Relations Using Logical Mechanisms and Argumentation Schemes
While argument mining has achieved significant success in classifying argumentative relations between statements (support, attack, and neutral), we have a limited computational understanding of logical mechanisms that co…
Argument MiningRelationRepresentation LearningDave the debater: a retrieval-based and generative argumentative dialogue agent
In this paper, we explore the problem of developing an argumentative dialogue agent that can be able to discuss with human users on controversial topics. We describe two systems that use retrieval-based and generative mo…
Argument MiningRetrievalStance Detection