Cats Rule and Dogs Drool!: Classifying Stance in Online Debate
نویسندگان
چکیده
A growing body of work has highlighted the challenges of identifying the stance a speaker holds towards a particular topic, a task that involves identifying a holistic subjective disposition. We examine stance classification on a corpus of 4873 posts across 14 topics on ConvinceMe.net, ranging from the playful to the ideological. We show that ideological debates feature a greater share of rebuttal posts, and that rebuttal posts are significantly harder to classify for stance, for both humans and trained classifiers. We also demonstrate that the number of subjective expressions varies across debates, a fact correlated with the performance of systems sensitive to sentimentbearing terms. We present results for identifing rebuttals with 63% accuracy, and for identifying stance on a per topic basis that range from 54% to 69%, as compared to unigram baselines that vary between 49% and 60%. Our results suggest that methods that take into account the dialogic context of such posts might be fruitful.
منابع مشابه
Why are You Taking this Stance? Identifying and Classifying Reasons in Ideological Debates
Recent years have seen a surge of interest in stance classification in online debates. Oftentimes, however, it is important to determine not only the stance expressed by an author in her debate posts, but also the reasons behind her supporting or opposing the issue under debate. We therefore examine the new task of reason classification in this paper. Given the close interplay between stance cl...
متن کاملStance Classification using Dialogic Properties of Persuasion
Public debate functions as a forum for both expressing and forming opinions, an important aspect of public life. We present results for automatically classifying posts in online debate as to the position, or STANCE that the speaker takes on an issue, such as Pro or Con. We show that representing the dialogic structure of the debates in terms of agreement relations between speakers, greatly impr...
متن کاملCMPS 245, Winter 17 Project: Ideology-Backed Stance Classification
The determination of stance in two-sided discussions/debates in online debate forums is a new and interesting problem in opinion mining. We target the task of classifying stance in ideological debates on online debate forums, and this is a rather challenging problem due to the nature of debate setting and the language used. (Hasan and Ng, ) had introduced the notion of using ideology as an inte...
متن کاملThat’s your evidence?: Classifying Stance in Online Political Debate
A growing body of work has highlighted the challenges of identifying the stance that a speaker holds towards a particular topic, a task that involves identifying a holistic subjective disposition. We examine stance classification on a corpus of 4873 posts from the debate website ConvinceMe.net, for 14 topics ranging from the playful to the ideological. We show that ideological debates feature a...
متن کاملThat is your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate
A growing body of work has highlighted the challenges of identifying the stance that a speaker holds towards a particular topic, a task that involves identifying a holistic subjective disposition. We examine stance classification on a corpus of 4731 posts from the debate website ConvinceMe.net, for 14 topics ranging from the playful to the ideological. We show that ideological debates feature a...
متن کامل