Magdalena Wojcieszak

dblp:115/8813 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-5456-4483ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 3 · 3 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 3 · 3 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 3 · 3 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Re-ranking Using Large Language Models for Mitigating Exposure to Harmful Content on Social Media Platforms
abstract
Rajvardhan Oak, Muhammad Haroon, Claire Wonjeong Jo, Magdalena Wojcieszak, Anshuman Chhabra. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025.
Rajvardhan Oak, Claire Wonjeong Jo, Magdalena Wojcieszak, Anshuman Chhabra
ACL (1)4
2025 MetaHarm: Harmful YouTube Video Dataset Annotated by Domain Experts, GPT-4-Turbo, and Crowdworkers
abstract
Short video platforms, such as YouTube, Instagram, or TikTok, are used by billions of users. These platforms expose users to harmful content, ranging from clickbait or physical harms to hate or misinformation. Yet, we lack a comprehensive understanding and measurement of online harm on short video platforms. Toward this end, we present two large-scale datasets of multi-modal and multi-categorical online harm: (1) 60,906 systematically selected potentially harmful YouTube videos and (2) 19,422 videos annotated by three labeling actors: trained domain experts, GPT-4-Turbo (using 14 image frames, 1 thumbnail, and text metadata), and crowdworkers (Amazon Mechanical Turk master workers). The annotated dataset includes both (a) binary classification (harmful vs. harmless) and (b) multi-label categorizations of six harm categories: Information, Hate and harassment, Addictive, Clickbait, Sexual, and Physical harms. Furthermore, the annotated dataset provides (1) ground truth data with videos annotated consistently across (a) all three actors and (b) the majority of the labeling actors, and (2) three data subsets labeled by individual actors. These datasets are expected to facilitate future work on online harm, aid in (multimodal) classification efforts, and advance the identification and potential mitigation of harmful content on video platforms.
Claire Wonjeong Jo, Magdalena Wojcieszak
ICWSM2
2025 Polarized Online Discourse on Abortion: Frames and Hostile Expressions Among Liberals and Conservatives
abstract
Abortion has been one of the most divisive issues in the United States. Yet, missing is comprehensive longitudinal evidence on how political divides on abortion are reflected in public discourse over time, on a national scale, and in response to key events before and after the overturn of Roe v Wade. We analyze a corpus of over 3.5M tweets related to abortion over the span of one year (January 2022 to January 2023) from over 1.1M users. We estimate users' ideology and rely on state-of-the-art transformer-based classifiers to identify expressions of hostility and extract five prominent frames surrounding abortion. We use those data to examine (a) how prevalent were expressions of hostility (i.e., anger, toxic speech, insults, obscenities, and hate speech), (b) what frames liberals and conservatives used to articulate their positions on abortion, and (c) the prevalence of hostile expressions in liberals and conservative discussions of these frames. We show that liberals and conservatives largely mirrored each other's use of hostile expressions: as liberals used more hostile rhetoric, so did conservatives, especially in response to key events. In addition, the two groups used distinct frames and discussed them in vastly distinct contexts, suggesting that liberals and conservatives have differing perspectives on abortion. Lastly, frames favored by one side provoked hostile reactions from the other: liberals use more hostile expressions when addressing religion, fetal personhood, and exceptions to abortion bans, whereas conservatives use more hostile language when addressing bodily autonomy and women's health. This signals disrespect and derogation, which may further preclude understanding and exacerbate polarization.
Ashwin Rao, Rong-Ching Chang, Qiankun Zhong, Kristina Lerman, Magdalena Wojcieszak
ICWSM5
2023 #RoeOverturned: Twitter Dataset on the Abortion Rights Controversy
abstract
On June 24, 2022, the United States Supreme Court overturned landmark rulings made in its 1973 verdict in Roe v. Wade. The justices by way of a majority vote in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, decided that abortion wasn't a constitutional right and returned the issue of abortion to the elected representatives. This decision triggered multiple protests and debates across the US, especially in the context of the midterm elections in November 2022. Given that many citizens use social media platforms to express their views and mobilize for collective action, and given that online debate provides tangible effects on public opinion, political participation, news media coverage, and the political decision-making, it is crucial to understand online discussions surrounding this topic. Toward this end, we present the first large-scale Twitter dataset collected on the abortion rights debate in the United States. We present a set of 74M tweets systematically collected over the course of one year from January 1, 2022 to January 6, 2023.
Rong-Ching Chang, Ashwin Rao, Qiankun Zhong, Magdalena Wojcieszak, Kristina Lerman
ICWSM4