Cited by 45Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionSpam and Phishing DetectionSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Cyberbullying detection system on social media using supervised machine learning

Open access
Perera, Andrea, Fernando, Pumudu·2024·Procedia Computer Science

Abstract

The use of digital and social media is growing every day as technology advances. People in the twenty-first century are growing up in a social media and internet-enabled society. Digital media offers a lot of opportunities, but people frequently tend to misuse them. On social networking sites, people spread anger toward a person. People are affected by cyberbullying in various ways. It has an impact on more than just health; numerous other factors put life in danger. Cyberbullying is a widespread modern phenomenon that people cannot completely avoid but can prevent. The author proposes a system for automatic cyberbullying detection and prevention using supervised machine learning. The system considers key characteristics of cyberbullying, such as the intention to harm, repeated behavior, and the use of abusive language. Support vector machines and logistic regression are employed to identify cyberbullying and related themes/categories such as race, physical, sexuality, and politics. This proposed method offers a novel theory for the detection of cyberbullying: texting has evolved over time due to changes in context usage, and language. In the dataset that includes tweets, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes, and Logistic Regression (LR) models were tested along with different Natural Language Processing methods. The accuracy of the system is improved by sentiment analysis, N-gram analysis, and other non-traditional feature extraction methods like Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) and profanity detection.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.procs.2024.06.200

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Cyberbullying detection models and intervention tools are often trained around rigid and subjective cyberbullying criteria, potentially overlooking experiences that adolescents perceive as harmful.

    “This is particularly relevant given that cyberbullying detection models and intervention tools are often trained around the rigid and subjective cyberbullying criteria, potentially overlooking experiences that adolescents perceive as harmful (124, 125).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 17 · Cited by 45

Authors
Perera, A., & Fernando, P.
Affiliations
Informatics Institute of Technology (LK)
Corresponding author
Perera, Andrea
Venue
Procedia Computer Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024
Volume
239
Pages
506-516
ISSN
1877-0509 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4401021328
Cited by
45
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 6
FWCI
13.22
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Procedia Computer Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
cyberbullying detection, social media, Twitter, abusive language, sentiment analysis, n-gram features, TF-IDF, profanity detection, support vector machine, logistic regression, naive Bayes, text classification

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