Many online hate groups exist to disparage others based on race, gender identity, sex, or other characteristics. The accessibility of these communities allows users to join multiple types of hate groups (e.g., a racist community and a misogynistic community), raising the question of whether users who join additional types of hate communities could be further radicalized compared to users who stay in one type of hate group. However, little is known about the dynamics of joining multiple types of hate groups, nor the effect of these groups on peripatetic users. We develop a new method to classify hate subreddits and the identities they disparage, then apply it to understand better how users come to join different types of hate subreddits. The hate classification technique utilizes human-validated deep learning models to extract the protected identities attacked, if any, across 168 subreddits. We find distinct clusters of subreddits targeting various identities, such as racist subreddits, xenophobic subreddits, and transphobic subreddits. We show that when users become active in their first hate subreddit, they have a high likelihood of becoming active in additional hate subreddits of a different category. We also find that users who join additional hate subreddits, especially those of a different category develop a wider hate group lexicon. These results then lead us to train a classification model that, as we demonstrate, usefully predicts the hate categories in which users will become active based on post text replied to and written. The accuracy of this model may be partly driven by peripatetic users often using the language of hate subreddits they eventually join. Overall, these results highlight the unique risks associated with hate communities on a social media platform, as discussion of alternative targets of hate may lead users to target more protected identities.

Online manipulation is a pressing concern for democracies, but the actions and strategies of coordinated inauthentic accounts, which have been used to interfere in elections, are not well understood. We analyze a five million-tweet multilingual dataset related to the 2017 French presidential election, when a major information campaign led by Russia called "#MacronLeaks" took place. We utilize heuristics to identify coordinated inauthentic accounts and detect attitudes, concerns and emotions within their tweets, collectively known as socio-linguistic characteristics. We find that coordinated accounts retweet other coordinated accounts far more than expected by chance, while being exceptionally active just before the second round of voting. Concurrently, socio-linguistic characteristics reveal that coordinated accounts share tweets promoting a candidate at three times the rate of non-coordinated accounts. Coordinated account tactics also varied in time to reflect news events and rounds of voting. Our analysis highlights the utility of socio-linguistic characteristics to inform researchers about tactics of coordinated accounts and how these may feed into online social manipulation.

The conflict between Israel and Palestinians significantly escalated after the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack, capturing global attention. To understand the public discourse on this conflict, we present a meticulously compiled dataset-IsamasRed-comprising nearly 400,000 conversations and over 8 million comments from Reddit, spanning from August 2023 to November 2023. We introduce an innovative keyword extraction framework leveraging a large language model to effectively identify pertinent keywords, ensuring a comprehensive data collection. Our initial analysis on the dataset, examining topics, controversy, emotional and moral language trends over time, highlights the emotionally charged and complex nature of the discourse. This dataset aims to enrich the understanding of online discussions, shedding light on the complex interplay between ideology, sentiment, and community engagement in digital spaces.

Online social platforms employ personalized feed algorithms to gather and prioritize messages from accounts followed by users, which distorts content's perceived popularity prior to personalization. We call this "exposure bias," and our research focuses on quantifying it using diverse exposure bias metrics, and we evaluate recommendation algorithms through various content ranking heuristics. Similarly we simulate activity in a network to assess the influence of such ranking heuristics on exposure bias. Furthermore, we are working on agent-based model simulations to comprehend the impact of ranking schemes, with the ultimate goal of exploring intervention effects over time. Our empirical findings reveal that users exposed to popularity-based feeds experience significantly lower exposure bias compared to chronologically-ordered feeds.

Detecting emotions expressed in text has become critical to a range of fields. In this work, we investigate ways to exploit label correlations in multi-label emotion recognition models to improve emotion detection. First, we develop two modeling approaches to the problem in order to capture word associations of the emotion words themselves, by either including the emotions in the input, or by leveraging Masked Language Modeling (MLM). Second, we inte-grate pairwise constraints of emotion representations as regularization terms alongside the classification loss of the models. We split these terms into two categories, local and global. The former dynamically change based on the gold labels, while the latter remain static during training. We demonstrate state-of-the-art performance across Spanish, English, and Arabic in SemEval 2018 Task 1 E-c using monolingual BERT-based models. On top of better performance, we also demonstrate improved robustness. Code is available at https://github.com/gchochla/Demux-MEmo.1

The need for emotional inference from text continues to diversify as more and more disciplines integrate emotions into their theories and applications. These needs include inferring different emotion types, handling multiple languages, and different annotation formats. A shared model between different configurations would enable the sharing of knowledge and a decrease in training costs, and would simplify the process of deploying emotion recognition models in novel environments. In this work, we study how we can build a single model that can transition between these different configurations by leveraging multilingual models and Demux, a transformer-based model whose input includes the emotions of interest, enabling us to dynamically change the emotions predicted by the model. Demux also produces emotion embeddings, and performing operations on them allows us to transition to clusters of emotions by pooling the embeddings of each cluster. We show that Demux can simultaneously transfer knowledge in a zero-shot manner to a new language, to a novel annotation format and to unseen emotions. Code is available at https://github.com/gchochla/Demux-MEmo.1

On October 27th, 2022, Elon Musk purchased Twitter, becoming its new CEO and firing many top executives in the process. Musk listed fewer restrictions on content moderation and removal of spam bots among his goals for the platform. Given findings of prior research on moderation and hate speech in online communities, the promise of less strict content moderation poses the concern that hate will rise on Twitter. We examine the levels of hate speech and prevalence of bots before and after Musk's acquisition of the platform. We find that hate speech rose dramatically upon Musk purchasing Twitter and the prevalence of most types of bots increased, while the prevalence of astroturf bots decreased.

Vaccine hesitancy, which has recently been driven by online narratives, significantly degrades the efficacy of vaccination strategies, such as those for COVID-19. Despite broad agreement in the medical community about the safety and efficacy of available vaccines, a large number of social media users continue to be inundated with false information about vaccines and are indecisive or unwilling to be vaccinated. The goal of this study is to better understand anti-vaccine sentiment by developing a system capable of automatically identifying the users responsible for spreading anti-vaccine narratives. We introduce a publicly available Python package capable of analyzing Twitter profiles to assess how likely that profile is to share anti-vaccine sentiment in the future. The software package is built using text embedding methods, neural networks, and automated dataset generation and is trained on several million tweets. We find this model can accurately detect anti-vaccine users up to a year before they tweet anti-vaccine hashtags or keywords. We also show examples of how text analysis helps us understand anti-vaccine discussions by detecting moral and emotional differences between anti-vaccine spreaders on Twitter and regular users. Our results will help researchers and policy-makers understand how users become anti-vaccine and what they discuss on Twitter. Policy-makers can utilize this information for better targeted campaigns that debunk harmful anti-vaccination myths.

Explicit and implicit bias clouds human judgment, leading to discriminatory treatment of disadvantaged groups. A fundamental goal of automated decisions is to avoid the pitfalls in human judgment by developing decision strategies that can be applied to all protected groups. Improving fairness of interventions via automated decision-inspired methods, however, has been under-utilized. In this paper, we propose a causal framework that learns optimal intervention policies from data subject to novel fairness constraints. We define two measures of treatment bias and infer treatment assignments that minimize the bias against protected groups while optimizing overall outcomes. We demonstrate the existence of trade-offs when balancing fairness and overall benefit; however, allowing preferential treatment of protected groups in certain circumstances (affirmative action) can dramatically improve the overall benefit while also preserving fairness. We apply our framework to data containing outcomes on standardized tests and show how it can be used to design real-world policies that fairly improve academic performance for different geographic areas. Our framework provides a principled way to learn fair treatment policies in real-world settings.

While online social media offers a way for ignored or stifled voices to be heard, it also allows users a platform to spread hateful speech. Such speech usually originates in fringe communities, yet it can spill over into mainstream channels. In this paper, we measure the impact of joining fringe hateful communities in terms of hate speech propagated to the rest of the social network. We leverage data from Reddit to assess the effect of joining one type of echo chamber: a digital community of like-minded users exhibiting hateful behavior. We measure members' usage of hate speech outside the studied community before and after they become active participants. Using Interrupted Time Series (ITS) analysis as a causal inference method, we gauge the spillover effect, in which hateful language from within a certain community can spread outside that community by using the level of out-of-community hate word usage as a proxy for learned hate. We investigate four different Reddit sub-communities (subreddits) covering three areas of hate speech: racism, misogyny and fat-shaming. In all three cases we find an increase in hate speech outside the originating community, implying that joining such community leads to a spread of hate speech throughout the platform. Moreover, users are found to pick up this new hateful speech for months after initially joining the community. We show that the harmful speech does not remain contained within the community. Our results provide new evidence of the harmful effects of echo chambers and the potential benefit of moderating them to reduce adoption of hateful speech.

The popularity of online gaming has grown dramatically, driven in part by streaming and the billion dollar e-sports industry. Online games regularly update their software to fix bugs, add functionality that improve the game’s look and feel, and change the game mechanics to keep the games fun and challenging. An open question, however, is the impact of these changes on player performance and game balance, as well as how players adapt to these sudden changes. To address these questions, we use causal inference to measure the impact of software patches to League of Legends, a popular team-based multiplayer online game. We show that game patches have substantially different impacts on players, depending on their skill level and whether they take breaks between games. We find that the gap between good and bad players increases after a patch, despite efforts to make gameplay more equal. Moreover, longer between-game breaks tend to improve performance after patches. Overall, our results highlight the utility of causal inference, and specifically heterogeneous treatment effect estimation, as a tool to quantify the complex mechanisms of game balance and its interplay with players’ performance.

The Internet has become one of the extreme right’s most valuable assets in disseminating information to a broader audience. We are interested in whether hateful alt-right online communities are simply rendezvous of individuals who already subscribe to hateful ideology, or if the existence of these online communities has the capacity to radicalize previously neutral individuals. Our preliminary findings show that joining a hateful subreddit does show evidence of increased hate word usage. These findings have broad implications on the role of the Internet in not only supporting, but growing the alt-right movement.

To reduce human error and prejudice, many high-stakes decisions have been turned over to machine algorithms. However, recent research suggests that this does not remove discrimination, and can perpetuate harmful stereotypes. While algorithms have been developed to improve fairness, they typically face at least one of three shortcomings: they are not interpretable, their prediction quality deteriorates quickly compared to unbiased equivalents, and %the methodology cannot easily extend other algorithms they are not easily transferable across models% (e.g., methods to reduce bias in random forests cannot be extended to neural networks) . To address these shortcomings, we propose a geometric method that removes correlations between data and any number of protected variables. Further, we can control the strength of debiasing through an adjustable parameter to address the trade-off between prediction quality and fairness. The resulting features are interpretable and can be used with many popular models, such as linear regression, random forest, and multilayer perceptrons. The resulting predictions are found to be more accurate and fair compared to several state-of-the-art fair AI algorithms across a variety of benchmark datasets. Our work shows that debiasing data is a simple and effective solution toward improving fairness.

Crowdsourcing systems aggregate decisions of many people to help users quickly identify high-quality options, such as the best answers to questions or interesting news stories. A long-standing issue in crowdsourcing is how option quality and human judgement heuristics interact to affect collective outcomes, such as the perceived popularity of options. We address this limitation by conducting a controlled experiment where subjects choose between two ranked options whose quality can be independently varied. We use this data to construct a model that quantifies how judgement heuristics and option quality combine when deciding between two options. The model reveals popularity-ranking can be unstable: unless the quality difference between the two options is sufficiently high, the higher quality option is not guaranteed to be eventually ranked on top. To rectify this instability, we create an algorithm that accounts for judgement heuristics to infer the best option and rank it first. This algorithm is guaranteed to be optimal if data matches the model. When the data does not match the model, however, simulations show that in practice this algorithm performs better or at least as well as popularity-based and recency-based ranking for any two-choice question. Our work suggests that algorithms relying on inference of mathematical models of user behavior can substantially improve outcomes in crowdsourcing systems.