Cited by 18Hate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningTopic Modeling

Data-Efficient Strategies for Expanding Hate Speech Detection into Under-Resourced Languages

Open access
Röttger, Paul, Nozza, Debora, Bianchi, Federico, Hovy, Dirk·2022·Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing

Abstract

Hate speech is a global phenomenon, but most hate speech datasets so far focus on Englishlanguage content.This hinders the development of more effective hate speech detection models in hundreds of languages spoken by billions across the world.More data is needed, but annotating hateful content is expensive, timeconsuming and potentially harmful to annotators.To mitigate these issues, we explore dataefficient strategies for expanding hate speech detection into under-resourced languages.In a series of experiments with mono-and multilingual models across five non-English languages, we find that 1) a small amount of target-language fine-tuning data is needed to achieve strong performance, 2) the benefits of using more such data decrease exponentially, and 3) initial fine-tuning on readily-available English data can partially substitute targetlanguage data and improve model generalisability.Based on these findings, we formulate actionable recommendations for hate speech detection in low-resource language settings.

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 · 10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.383

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • A small volume of data was used to train models for the classification of both cyberbullying and non-cyberbullying text.

    “Based on the utilization of a small dataset for training learning models to detect cyberbullying on social media platforms, the review identified that a small volume of data was used to train models for the classification of both cyberbullying and non-cyberbullying text [147,148].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Antigoni Founta, Constantinos Djouvas, Despoina Chatzakou, Ilias Leontiadis, Jeremy Blackburn, Gi- anluca Stringhini, Athena Vakali, Michael Sirivianos, and Nicolas Kourtellis. 2018. Large scale crowd- sourcing and characterization of Twitter abusive be- havior. Proceedings of the International AAAI Con- ference on Web and Social Media, 12(1).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Röttger, P., Nozza, D., Bianchi, F., & Hovy, D.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Bocconi University (IT)
  • Stanford University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Published
2022
Pages
5674-5691
OpenAlex
W4385573219
Cited by
18
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.35
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • European Commission
  • Fondazione Cariplo
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
hate speech detection, low-resource languages, data efficiency, fine-tuning, multilingual models, annotation cost, model generalization

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