CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 294Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningMental Health via Writing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hate Lingo: A Target-Based Linguistic Analysis of Hate Speech in Social Media

Open access
ElSherief, Mai, Kulkarni, Vivek, Nguyen, Dana, Yang Wang, William, Belding, Elizabeth·2018·Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
DOI 10.1609/icwsm.v12i1.15041
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

While social media empowers freedom of expression and individual voices, it also enables anti-social behavior, online harassment, cyberbullying, and hate speech. In this paper, we deepen our understanding of online hate speech by focusing on a largely neglected but crucial aspect of hate speech -- its target: either directed towards a specific person or entity, or generalized towards a group of people sharing a common protected characteristic. We perform the first linguistic and psycholinguistic analysis of these two forms of hate speech and reveal the presence of interesting markers that distinguish these types of hate speech. Our analysis reveals that Directed hate speech, in addition to being more personal and directed, is more informal, angrier, and often explicitly attacks the target (via name calling) with fewer analytic words and more words suggesting authority and influence. Generalized hate speech, on the other hand, is dominated by religious hate, is characterized by the use of lethal words such as murder, exterminate, and kill; and quantity words such as million and many. Altogether, our work provides a data-driven analysis of the nuances of online-hate speech that enables not only a deepened understanding of hate speech and its social implications, but also its detection.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/icwsm.v12i1.15041

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

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

Show all 47 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [4]4. Chen, D.; Schneider, N.; Das, D.; and Smith, N. A. 2010. Se- mafor: Frame Argument Resolution with Log-linear Mod- els. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–292 of 292

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
ElSherief, M., Kulkarni, V., Nguyen, D., Yang Wang, W., & Belding, E.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media
Publisher
Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)
Published
2018-06-15
Volume
12
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2162-3449 (ISSN-L)
  • 2334-0770
DOI
10.1609/icwsm.v12i1.15041
OpenAlex
W2797630160
Cited by
294
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 6
FWCI
13.93
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
Keywords
online hate speech, social media, linguistic markers, psycholinguistic analysis, cyberbullying, online harassment, name-calling, hate speech detection

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