United States

The perceived toxicity of language can vary based on someone&#39;s identity and beliefs, but this variation is often ignored when collecting toxic language datasets, resulting in dataset and model biases. We seek to understand the who, why, and what behind biases in toxicity annotations. In two online studies with demographically and politically diverse participants, we investigate the effect of annotator identities (who) and beliefs (why), drawing from social psychology research about hate speech, free speech, racist beliefs, political leaning, and more. We disentangle what is annotated as toxic by considering posts with three characteristics: anti-Black language, African American English (AAE) dialect, and vulgarity. Our results show strong associations between annotator identity and beliefs and their ratings of toxicity. Notably, more conservative annotators and those who scored highly on our scale for racist beliefs were less likely to rate anti-Black language as toxic, but more likely to rate AAE as toxic. We additionally present a case study illustrating how a popular toxicity detection system&#39;s ratings inherently reflect only specific beliefs and perspectives. Our findings call for contextualizing toxicity labels in social variables, which raises immense implications for toxic language annotation and detection.


NAACL 2022

Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detection

## Welcome to NAACL 2022!
The Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL) is taking place July 10-15, 2022 as a hybrid event, in Seattle, WA and online. We are happy to welcome all of you to conference! 
 
The main conference program features oral presentations, in-person and virtual posters and demo sessions, a plenary session for our best paper presentations and awards, keynote presentations, a plenary panel on the place of linguistics and symbolic structures in NLP, and an Industrial Track panel on Careers in NLP.
 
Posters (including Findings of NAACL 2022) and demos are grouped by areas for both the in-person and the virtual sessions. For the virtual component, the talks will be on Zoom and the posters and the demos will be in GatherTown. The Student Research Workshop and will have an oral session and a poster session.
 
The program also features 6 Tutorials and 26 Workshops.
 
 We wish you a wonderful conference!
 
[The NAACL 2022 Organizing Committee](https://2022.naacl.org/committees/organization/)

2022 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

The perceived toxicity of language can vary based on someone's identity and beliefs, but this variation is often ignored when collecting toxic language datasets, resulting in dataset and model biases. We seek to understand the who, why, and what behind biases in toxicity annotations. In two online studies with demographically and politically diverse participants, we investigate the effect of annotator identities (who) and beliefs (why), drawing from social psychology research about hate speech, free speech, racist beliefs, political leaning, and more. We disentangle what is annotated as toxic by considering posts with three characteristics: anti-Black language, African American English (AAE) dialect, and vulgarity. Our results show strong associations between annotator identity and beliefs and their ratings of toxicity. Notably, more conservative annotators and those who scored highly on our scale for racist beliefs were less likely to rate anti-Black language as toxic, but more likely to rate AAE as toxic. We additionally present a case study illustrating how a popular toxicity detection system's ratings inherently reflect only specific beliefs and perspectives. Our findings call for contextualizing toxicity labels in social variables, which raises immense implications for toxic language annotation and detection.


technical paper

Avoiding to rely on dataset artifacts to predict hate speech is at the cornerstone of robust and fair hate speech detection. In this paper we critically analyze lexical biases in hate speech detection via a cross-platform study, disentangling various types of spurious and authentic artifacts and analyzing their impact on out-of-distribution fairness and robustness. We experiment with existing approaches and propose simple yet surprisingly effective data-centric baselines. Our results on English data across four platforms show that distinct spurious artifacts require different treatments to ultimately attain both robustness and fairness in hate speech detection. To encourage research in this direction, we release all baseline models and the code to compute artifacts, pointing it out as a complementary and necessary addition to the data statements practice.

Features or Spurious Artifacts? Data-centric Baselines for Fair and Robust Hate Speech Detection

Masked Language Models (MLMs) pre-trained by predicting masked tokens on large corpora have been used successfully in natural language processing tasks for a variety of languages.
Unfortunately, it was reported that MLMs also learn discriminative biases regarding attributes such as gender and race.
Because most studies have focused on MLMs in English, the bias of MLMs in other languages has rarely been investigated.
Manual annotation of evaluation data for languages other than English has been challenging due to the cost and difficulty in recruiting annotators.
Moreover, the existing bias evaluation methods require the stereotypical sentence pairs consisting of the same context with attribute words (e.g. He/She is a nurse).
We propose Multilingual Bias Evaluation (MBE) score, to evaluate bias in various languages using only English attribute word lists and parallel corpora between the target language and English without requiring manually annotated data.
We evaluated MLMs in eight languages using the MBE and confirmed that gender-related biases are encoded in MLMs for all those languages.
We manually created datasets for gender bias in Japanese and Russian to evaluate the validity of the MBE.
The results show that the bias scores reported by the MBE significantly correlates with that computed from the above manually created datasets and the existing English datasets for gender bias.

Gender Bias in Masked Language Models for Multiple Languages

A hyperbolic relevance matching model for neural keyphrase extraction.

Hyperbolic Relevance Matching for Neural Keyphrase Extraction

Event trigger detection, entity mention recognition, event argument extraction, and relation extraction are the four important tasks in information extraction that have been performed jointly (Joint Information Extraction - JointIE) to avoid error propagation and leverage dependencies between the task instances (i.e., event triggers, entity mentions, relations, and event arguments). However, previous JointIE models often assume heuristic manually-designed dependency between the task instances and mean-field factorization for the joint distribution of instance labels, thus unable to capture optimal dependencies among instances and labels to improve representation learning and IE performance. To overcome these limitations, we propose to induce a dependency graph among task instances from data to boost representation learning. To better capture dependencies between instance labels, we propose to directly estimate their joint distribution via Conditional Random Fields. Noise Contrastive Estimation is introduced to address the maximization of the intractable joint likelihood for model training. Finally, to improve the decoding with greedy or beam search in prior work, we present Simulated Annealing to better find the globally optimal assignment for instance labels at decoding time. Experimental results show that our proposed model outperforms previous models on multiple IE tasks across 5 datasets and 2 languages.

Joint Extraction of Entities, Relations, and Events via Modeling Inter-Instance and Inter-Label Dependencies

Users write to-dos as personal notes to themselves, about things they need to complete, remember or organize. To-do texts are usually short and under-specified, which poses a challenge for current text representation models. Yet, understanding and representing their meaning is the first step towards providing intelligent assistance for to-do management. We address this problem by proposing a neural multi-task learning framework, LITE, which extracts representations of to-do tasks with a multi-head attention mechanism on top of a pre-trained text encoder. To adapt representation models to to-do texts, we collect weak-supervision labels from semantically rich external resources (e.g., dynamic common-sense knowledge base), following the principle that to-do tasks with similar intents have similar labels. We then train the model on multiple generative/predictive training objectives jointly. We evaluate our representation model on five downstream tasks and show that our approach consistently improves performance over baseline models, achieving an error reduction of up to 38.7%.

LITE: Intent-based Task Representation Learning Using Weak Supervision

We present a novel approach incorporating transformer-based language models into infectious disease modelling. Text-derived features are quantified by tracking high-density clusters of sentence-level representations of Reddit posts within specific US states’ COVID19 subreddits. We benchmark these clustered embedding features against features extracted from other high-quality datasets. In a threshold classification task, we show that they outperform all other feature types at predicting upward trend signals, a significant result for infectious disease modelling in areas where epidemiological data is unreliable. Subsequently, in a time-series forecasting task we fully utilise the predictive power of the caseload and compare the relative strengths of using different supplementary datasets as covariate feature sets in a transformer-based time-series model.

Forecasting COVID-19 Caseloads Using Unsupervised Embedding Clusters of Social Media Posts

In this work, we study Unsupervised Domain Adaptation (UDA) in a challenging self-supervised approach. One of the difficulties is how to learn task discrimination in the absence of target labels. Unlike previous literature which directly aligns cross-domain distributions or leverages reverse gradient, we propose Domain Confused Contrastive Learning (DCCL) to bridge the source and the target domains via domain puzzles, and retain discriminative representations after adaptation. Technically, DCCL searches for a most domain-challenging direction and exquisitely crafts domain confused augmentations as positive pairs, then it contrastively encourages the model to pull representations towards the other domain, thus learning more stable and effective domain invariances. We also investigate whether contrastive learning necessarily helps with UDA when performing other data augmentations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DCCL significantly outperforms baselines.

Domain Confused Contrastive Learning for Unsupervised Domain Adaptation

Text style transfer (TST) is a well-known task whose goal is to convert the style of the text (e.g., from formal to informal) while preserving its content. Recently, it has been shown that both syntactic and semantic similarities between the source and the converted text are important for TST. However, the interaction between these two concepts has not been modeled. In this work, we propose a novel method based on Optimal Transport for TST to simultaneously incorporate syntactic and semantic information into similarity computation between the source and the converted text. We evaluate the proposed method in both supervised and unsupervised settings. Our analysis reveal the superiority of the proposed model in both settings.

Text Style Transfer via Optimal Transport

In the context of data labeling, NLP researchers are increasingly interested in having humans select rationales, a subset of input tokens relevant to the chosen label. We conducted a 332-participant online user study to understand how humans select rationales, especially how different instructions and user interface affordances impact the rationales chosen. Participants labeled ten movie reviews as positive or negative, selecting words and phrases supporting their label as rationales. We varied the instructions given, the rationale-selection task, and the user interface. Participants often selected about 12\% of input tokens as rationales, but selected fewer if unable to drag over multiple tokens at once. Whereas participants were near unanimous in their data labels, they were far less consistent in their rationales. The user interface affordances and task greatly impacted the types of rationales chosen. We also observed large variance across participants.

Explaining Why: How Instructions and User Interfaces Impact Annotator Rationales When Labeling Text Data

Automatic summarization methods are efficient but can suffer from low quality. In comparison, manual summarization is expensive but produces higher quality. Can humans and AI collaborate to improve summarization performance? In similar text generation tasks (e.g., machine translation), human-AI collaboration in the form of "post-editing" AI-generated text reduces human workload and improves the quality of AI output. Therefore, we explored whether post-editing offers advantages in text summarization. Specifically, we conducted an experiment with 72 participants, comparing post-editing provided summaries with manual summarization for summary quality, human efficiency, and user experience on formal (XSum news) and informal (Reddit posts) text. This study sheds valuable insights on when post-editing is useful for text summarization: it helped in some cases (e.g., when participants lacked domain knowledge) but not in others (e.g., when provided summaries include inaccurate information). Participants' different editing strategies and needs for assistance offer implications for future human-AI summarization systems. 

Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detection

Downloads

Next from NAACL 2022

Features or Spurious Artifacts? Data-centric Baselines for Fair and Robust Hate Speech Detection

Similar lecture

SATLab at SemEval-2022 Task 4: Trying to Detect Patronizing and Condescending Language with only Character and Word N-grams

Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detection

.css-70qvj9{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}Downloads

Next from NAACL 2022

Features or Spurious Artifacts? Data-centric Baselines for Fair and Robust Hate Speech Detection

Similar lecture

SATLab at SemEval-2022 Task 4: Trying to Detect Patronizing and Condescending Language with only Character and Word N-grams

Downloads