Microblogs as a new textual domain offer a unique proposition for sentiment analysis. Their short document length suggests any sentiment they contain is compact and explicit. However, this short length coupled with their noisy nature can pose difficulties for standard machine learning document representations. In this work we examine the hypothesis that it is easier to classify the sentiment in these short form documents than in longer form documents. Surprisingly, we find classifying sentiment in microblogs easier than in blogs and make a number of observations pertaining to the challenge of supervised learning for sentiment analysis in microblogs.

The increased online presence of jihadists has raised the possibility of individuals being radicalised via the Internet. To date, the study of violent radicalisation has focused on dedicated jihadist websites and forums. This may not be the ideal starting point for such research, as participants in these venues may be described as "already made-up minds". Crawling a global social networking platform, such as YouTube, on the other hand, has the potential to unearth content and interaction aimed at radicalisation of those with little or no apparent prior interest in violent jihadism. This research explores whether such an approach is indeed fruitful. We collected a large dataset from a group within YouTube that we identified as potentially having a radicalising agenda. We analysed this data using social network analysis and sentiment analysis tools, examining the topics discussed and what the sentiment polarity (positive or negative) is towards these topics. In particular, we focus on gender differences in this group of users, suggesting most extreme and less tolerant views among female users.

Evaluation of sentiment analysis, like large-scale IR evaluation, relies on the accuracy of human assessors to create judgments. Subjectivity in judgments is a problem for relevance assessment and even more so in the case of sentiment annotations. In this study we examine the degree to which assessors agree upon sentence-level sentiment annotation. We show that inter-assessor agreement is not contingent on document length or frequency of sentiment but correlates positively with automated opinion retrieval performance. We also examine the individual annotation categories to determine which categories pose most difficulty for annotators.