论文标题

在Twitter叙述中量化潜在的道德基础:叙利亚白头盔的案例错误信息

Quantifying Latent Moral Foundations in Twitter Narratives: The Case of the Syrian White Helmets Misinformation

论文作者

Mutlu, Ece Çiğdem, Oghaz, Toktam, Tütüncüler, Ege, Jasser, Jasser, Garibay, Ivan

论文摘要

多年来,许多研究都采用情感分析来了解人们的选择和感觉,沟通方式以及他们所属的社区背后的推理。我们认为,对道德维度以及情感分析的更多深入了解可以提供较高的结果。理解道德基础可以在感知文本数据的预期含义方面产生强大的结果,因为道德的概念提供了有关信息处理和非意识认知过程的不可观察特征的其他信息。因此,我们研究了从2018年4月1日至2019年4月30日的Twitter用户与Twitter用户相关的推文的潜在道德载荷。对于在推文中进行良性修辞的操作和量化,我们使用延伸的道德基础,其中五个心理学维度(Harm/Care,公平,公平,公平/公平/公平/互惠/忠诚度/忠诚度),依次/忠诚度,授权/忠诚度,范围/忠诚度,范围/忠诚度,范围/忠诚。我们表明,人们倾向于分享涉及美德道德言论的推文,而不是涉及副修辞的推文。我们观察到,这五个维度之间的推文道德修辞模式在不同时期非常相似,而五个维度的强度是时间变化的。即使使用公平/互惠,群体内/忠诚度或纯度/神圣性修辞之间没有显着差异,但对伤害/护理修辞的使用较少也很显着且出色。此外,尽管涉及危害/护理维度的推文数量很低,但在涉及伤害/护理言论的推文中观察到了道德修辞和道德之间的两极分化。

For years, many studies employed sentiment analysis to understand the reasoning behind people's choices and feelings, their communication styles, and the communities which they belong to. We argue that gaining more in-depth insight into moral dimensions coupled with sentiment analysis can potentially provide superior results. Understanding moral foundations can yield powerful results in terms of perceiving the intended meaning of the text data, as the concept of morality provides additional information on the unobservable characteristics of information processing and non-conscious cognitive processes. Therefore, we studied latent moral loadings of Syrian White Helmets-related tweets of Twitter users from April 1st, 2018 to April 30th, 2019. For the operationalization and quantification of moral rhetoric in tweets, we use Extended Moral Foundations Dictionary in which five psychological dimensions (Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, In-group/Loyalty, Authority/Respect and Purity/Sanctity) are considered. We show that people tend to share more tweets involving the virtue moral rhetoric than the tweets involving the vice rhetoric. We observe that the pattern of the moral rhetoric of tweets among these five dimensions are very similar during different time periods, while the strength of the five dimension is time-variant. Even though there is no significant difference between the use of Fairness/Reciprocity, In-group/Loyalty or Purity/Sanctity rhetoric, the less use of Harm/Care rhetoric is significant and remarkable. Besides, the strength of the moral rhetoric and the polarization in morality across people are mostly observed in tweets involving Harm/Care rhetoric despite the number of tweets involving the Harm/Care dimension is low.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源