Online antisocial behavior, such as cyberbullying, harassment, and trolling, is a widespread problem that threatens free discussion and has negative physical and mental health consequences for victims and communities. While prior work has proposed automated methods to identify hostile comments in online discussions, these methods work retrospectively on comments that have already been posted, making it difficult to intervene before an interaction escalates. In this paper we instead consider the problem of forecasting future hostilities in online discussions, which we decompose into two tasks: (1) given an initial sequence of non-hostile comments in a discussion, predict whether some future comment will contain hostility; and (2) given the first hostile comment in a discussion, predict whether this will lead to an escalation of hostility in subsequent comments. Thus, we aim to forecast both the presence and intensity of hostile comments based on linguistic and social features from earlier comments. To evaluate our approach, we introduce a corpus of over 30K annotated Instagram comments from over 1,100 posts. Our approach is able to predict the appearance of a hostile comment on an Instagram post ten or more hours in the future with an AUC of .82 (task 1), and can furthermore distinguish between high and low levels of future hostility with an AUC of .91 (task 2).
Cursing is not uncommon during conversations in the physical world: 0.5 to 0.7 of all the words we speak are curse words, given that 1 of all the words are first-person plural pronouns (e.g., we, us, our). On social media, people can instantly chat with friends without face-to-face interaction, usually in a more public fashion and broadly disseminated through highly connected social network. Will these distinctive features of social media lead to a change in people's cursing behavior? In this paper, we examine the characteristics of cursing activity on a popular social media platform - Twitter, involving the analysis of about 51 million tweets and about 14 million users. In particular, we explore a set of questions that have been recognized as crucial for understanding cursing in offline communications by prior studies, including the ubiquity, utility, and contextual dependencies of cursing. As user-generated Web content increases, the amount of inappropriate and or objectionable content also grows. Several scholarly communities are addressing how to detect and manage such content: research in computer vision focuses on detection of inappropriate images, natural language processing technology has advanced to recognize insults. However, profanity detection systems remain flawed. Current list-based profanity detection systems have two limitations. First, they are easy to circumvent and easily become stale - that is, they cannot adapt to misspellings, abbreviations, and the fast pace of profane slang evolution. Secondly, they offer a one-size fits all solution; they typically do not accommodate domain, community and context specific needs. However, social settings have their own normative behaviors - what is deemed acceptable in one community may not be in another. In this paper, through analysis of comments from a social news site, we provide evidence that current systems are performing poorly and evaluate the cases on which they fail. We then address community differences regarding creation tolerance of profanity and suggest a shift to more contextually nuanced profanity detection systems. A key challenge for automatic hate-speech detection on social media is the separation of hate speech from other instances of offensive language. Lexical detection methods tend to have low precision because they classify all messages containing particular terms as hate speech and previous work using supervised learning has failed to distinguish between the two categories. We used a crowd-sourced hate speech lexicon to collect tweets containing hate speech keywords. We use crowd-sourcing to label a sample of these tweets into three categories: those containing hate speech, only offensive language, and those with neither. We train a multi-class classifier to distinguish between these different categories. Close analysis of the predictions and the errors shows when we can reliably separate hate speech from other offensive language and when this differentiation is more difficult. We find that racist and homophobic tweets are more likely to be classified as hate speech but that sexist tweets are generally classified as offensive. Tweets without explicit hate keywords are also more difficult to classify. Social interactions in multiplayer online games are an essential feature for a growing number of players world-wide. However, this interaction between the players might lead to the emergence of undesired and unintended behavior, particularly if the game is designed to be highly competitive. Communication channels might be abused to harass and verbally assault other players, which negates the very purpose of entertainment games by creating a toxic player-community. By using a novel natural language processing framework, we detect profanity in chat-logs of a popular Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) game and develop a method to classify toxic remarks. We show how toxicity is non-trivially linked to game success.