The DOI matches its Crossref record; 55 of the 55 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
That is your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate
Open accessOverview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Studies in this respect define stance as an overall position held by a person toward an object, idea, or position (Somasundaran and Wiebe 2009;Walker et al. 2012).”
From Detection and Resolution of Rumours in Social Media: A Survey (2019) · cites this paper as Walker et al. 2012
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Stance classification is well studied in online debates where the aim is to classify the user entries as "for" or "against."”
From Detection and Resolution of Rumours in Social Media: A Survey (2019) · cites this paper as Walker et al. 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis
Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008) · now publishers, Inc. eBooks · doi:10.1561/9781601981516 · Cited by 6,720
Opinion mining and sentiment analysis
Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008) · Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1561/1500000011 · Cited by 6,372
Variation across Speech and Writing
Biber, D. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511621024 · Cited by 5,227
Accurate unlexicalized parsing
Klein, D., & Manning, C. D. (2003) · Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics - ACL '03 · doi:10.3115/1075096.1075150 · Cited by 3,008
Generating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Parses
de Marneffe, M.-C., MacCartney, B., & Manning, C. D. (2006) · Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) · doi:10.63317/3wtkaidk6ea8 · Cited by 2,258
Crystal, D. (2001) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139164771 · Cited by 2,233
Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC): Pronounced “Luke,” . . . and Other Useful Facts
Chung, C. K., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2012) · Applied Natural Language Processing · doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-741-8.ch012 · Cited by 2,151
Advances in automatic text summarization
(2000) · Computers & Mathematics with Applications · doi:10.1016/s0898-1221(00)90017-8 · Cited by 681
Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC2007)
Pennebaker, J., Booth, R. J., & Francis, M. T. (2007) · ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) · Cited by 604
Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Lapata, M., & Ng, H. T. (2008) · Cited by 567
Get out the vote: determining support or opposition from congressional floor-debate transcripts
Thomas, M., Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2006) · Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '06 · doi:10.3115/1610075.1610122 · Cited by 483
Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web
(2004) · doi:10.1145/988672 · Cited by 479
Dimensions of Compliance-Gaining Behavior: An Empirical Analysis
Marwell, G., & Schmitt, D. R. (1967) · Sociometry · doi:10.2307/2786181 · Cited by 408
Identification of influencers — Measuring influence in customer networks
Kiss, C., & Bichler, M. (2008) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2008.06.007 · Cited by 387
Kaplan, R. M. (2010) · Cited by 380
Learning with compositional semantics as structural inference for subsentential sentiment analysis
Choi, Y., & Cardie, C. (2008) · Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '08 · doi:10.3115/1613715.1613816 · Cited by 332
Basic meanings of you know and I mean
Fox Tree, J. E., & Schrock, J. C. (2002) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/s0378-2166(02)00027-9 · Cited by 303
Recognizing Stances in Ideological On-Line Debates
Somasundaran, S., & Wiebe, J. (2010) · Cited by 303
Recognizing stances in online debates
Somasundaran, S., & Wiebe, J. (2009) · Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP: Volume 1 - ACL-IJCNLP '09 · doi:10.3115/1687878.1687912 · Cited by 303
Mining newsgroups using networks arising from social behavior
Agrawal, R., Rajagopalan, S., Srikant, R., & Xu, Y. (2003) · Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on World Wide Web - WWW '03 · doi:10.1145/775152.775227 · Cited by 287
Leave a Reply: An Analysis of Weblog Comments
Mishne, G., & Glance, N. (2006) · Cited by 287
Automatic sense prediction for implicit discourse relations in text
Pitler, E., Louis, A., & Nenkova, A. (2009) · Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP: Volume 2 - ACL-IJCNLP '09 · doi:10.3115/1690219.1690241 · Cited by 276
Which side are you on?: identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels
Lin, W.-H., Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., & Hauptmann, A. (2006) · Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning - CoNLL-X '06 · doi:10.3115/1596276.1596297 · Cited by 269
Predicting consumer sentiments from online text
Bai, X. (2010) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2010.08.024 · Cited by 250
Mari Ostendorf, E., Collins, M., Narayanan, S. R., & Oard, D. W. (2009) · Cited by 224
Inkpen, D. Z., & Association for Computing Machinery-Digital Library (2010) · Cited by 220
Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Posters
Joshi, A. K., Huang, C., & Jurafsky, D. (2010) · Cited by 215
Multi-Level Structured Models for Document-Level Sentiment Classification
Yessenalina, A., Yue, Y., & Cardie, C. (2010) · Cited by 206
Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Jurafsky, D., & Gaussier, É. (2006) · Cited by 200
Generalizing dependency features for opinion mining
Joshi, M., & Rosé, C. P. (2009) · Joint Conference of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (ACL-IJCNLP) · doi:10.3115/1667583.1667680 · Cited by 176
More than words: syntactic packaging and implicit sentiment
Greene, S., & Resnik, P. (2009) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.3115/1620754.1620827 · Cited by 165
Murakami, A., & Raymond, R. (2010) · Cited by 145
Discourse Markers in Spontaneous Speech: Oh What a Difference an Oh Makes
Tree, J. E. F., & Schrock, J. C. (1999) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2613 · Cited by 145
Self-citationTaking sides: user classification for informal online political discourse
Malouf, R., & Mullen, T. (2008) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/10662240810862239 · Cited by 118
Realization of Discourse Relations by Other Means: Alternative Lexicalizations
Prasad, R., Joshi, A. K., & Webber, B. (2010) · Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) · Cited by 101
Discourse Markers across Speakers and Settings
Tree, J. E. F. (2010) · Language and Linguistics Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1749-818x.2010.00195.x · Cited by 98
Self-citationHow can you say such things?!?: Recognizing Disagreement in Informal Political Argument
Abbott, R., Walker, M. A., Anand, P., Tree, J. E. F., Bowmani, R., & King, J. (2011) · Cited by 88
Self-citationDiscourse level opinion interpretation
Somasundaran, S., Wiebe, J., & Ruppenhofer, J. (2008) · International Conference on Computational Linguistics · doi:10.3115/1599081.1599182 · Cited by 79
Proceedings of the 2008 international conference on Digital government research
Charbonneau, M., Diamond, L., Shulman, S. W., Chun, S. A., Janssen, M., & Gil-García, J. R. (2008) · Cited by 75
Bansal, M., Cardie, C., & Lee, L. (2008) · International Conference on Computational Linguistics · Cited by 71
Proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP 2009 Conference Short Papers
Blunsom, P., Cohn, T., Goldwater, S. J., et al. (2009) · The Association for Computational Linguistics · Cited by 60
Inferring Acceptance and Rejection in Dialog by Default Rules of Inference
Walker, M. A. (1996) · Language and Speech · doi:10.1177/002383099603900306 · Cited by 59
Self-citationThe generic/actual argument model of practical reasoning
Yearwood, J. L., & Stranieri, A. (2004) · Decision Support Systems · doi:10.1016/j.dss.2004.07.004 · Cited by 46
Perlocutions: The Achilles' heel of speech act theory
Marcu, D. (2000) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/s0378-2166(99)00121-6 · Cited by 42
Determining the Polarity and Source of Opinions Expressed in Political Debates
Balahur, A., Kozareva, Z., & Montoyo, A. (2009) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00382-0_38 · Cited by 42
Building and Refining Rhetorical-Semantic Relation Models
Blair-Goldensohn, S., McKeown, K. R., & Rambow, O. (2007) · doi:10.7916/d80p17c4 · Cited by 33
Wang, Y., & Rosé, C. P. (2010) · Cited by 24
Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning
Màrquez, L., & Klein, D. (2006) · Cited by 23
Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing
Suhel, J., & DELMONTE, R. (2008) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-78135-6 · Cited by 20
Which Side are You on? Identifying Perspectives at the Document and Sentence Levels
Lin, W.-H., Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., & Hauptmann, A. (2018) · Figshare · doi:10.1184/r1/6612902 · Cited by 19
Active learning for e-rulemaking: public comment categorization
(2008) · Scholarship @ Cornell Law (Cornell University) · doi:10.5555/1367832.1367873 · Cited by 13
The Effect of Substituting Discourse Markers on Their Role in Dialogue
Groen, M., Noyes, J., & Verstraten, F. A. J. (2010) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/01638530903223372 · Cited by 13
Proceedings of Coling 2008: Companion volume: Posters
Egg, M., & Regneri, M. (2008) · Cited by 12
Walker, M. A. (1994) · Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society · doi:10.3765/bls.v20i1.1467 · Cited by 11
Self-citation
Cited by
Detection and Resolution of Rumours in Social Media: A Survey
Zubiaga, A., Aker, A., Bontcheva, K., Liakata, M., & Procter, R. (2019) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3161603 · Cited by 862
Metadata
- Authors
- Walker, M. A., Anand, P., Abbott, R., Tree, J. E. F., Martell, C., & King, J.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
- Naval Postgraduate School (US)
- Corresponding author
- Walker, Marilyn A.
- Venue
- Decision Support Systems
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 719-729
- ISSN
- 0167-9236 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2159396192
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 6.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license (tdm)
- www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/ (am, 201 d)
- Locations
- Decision Support Systems (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
- Army Research Laboratory
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
- Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Keywords
- stance detection, online political debate, subjective expression, ideological debate
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
