Karthik Dinakar
Abstract
Cyberbullying (harassment on social networks) is widely recognized as a serious social problem, especially for adolescents. It is as much a threat to the viability of online social networks for youth today as spam once was to email in the early days of the Internet. Current work to tackle this problem has involved social and psychological studies on its prevalence as well as its negative effects on adolescents. While true solutions rest on teaching youth to have healthy personal relationships, few have considered innovative design of social network software as a tool for mitigating this problem. Mitigating cyberbullying involves two key components: robust techniques for effective detection and reflective user interfaces that encourage users to reflect upon their behavior and their choices.
Spam filters have been successful by applying statistical approaches like Bayesian networks and hidden Markov models. They can, like Google’s GMail, aggregate human spam judgments because spam is sent nearly identically to many people. Bullying is more personalized, varied, and contextual. In this work, we present an approach for bullying detection based on state-of-the-art natural language processing and a common sense knowledge base, which permits recognition over a broad spectrum of topics in everyday life. We analyze a more narrow range of particular subject matter associated with bullying (e.g. appearance, intelligence, racial and ethnic slurs, social acceptance, and rejection), and construct BullySpace, a common sense knowledge base that encodes particular knowledge about bullying situations. We then perform joint reasoning with common sense knowledge about a wide range of everyday life topics. We analyze messages using our novel AnalogySpace common sense reasoning technique. We also take into account social network analysis and other factors. We evaluate the model on real-world instances that have been reported by users on Formspring, a social networking website that is popular with teenagers.
On the intervention side, we explore a set of reflective user-interaction paradigms with the goal of promoting empathy among social network participants. We propose an “air traffic control”-like dashboard, which alerts moderators to large-scale outbreaks that appear to be escalating or spreading and helps them prioritize the current deluge of user complaints. For potential victims, we provide educational material that informs them about how to cope with the situation, and connects them with emotional support from others. A user evaluation shows that in-context, targeted, and dynamic help during cyberbullying situations fosters end-user reflection that promotes better coping strategies.
- Blumemenfeld, W. J. and Cooper, R. M. 2010. LGBT and allied youth responses to cyberbulling: Policy implication. Int. J. Critical Pedagogy.Google Scholar
- Boyd, D. 2007. Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning, Youth, Identity, and Digital Media, David Buckingham, Ed., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Bramsen, P., Escobar-Molano, M., Patel, A., and Alonso, M. 2011. Extracting social power relationships from natural language. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language. 773--782. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cambria, E., Hussain, A., Havasi, C., and Eckl, C. 2009. AffectiveSpace: Blending common sense and affective knowledge to perform emotive reasoning. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis.Google Scholar
- Cambria, E.,Speer, R., and Havasi, C. 2010. SenticNet: A publicly available semantic resource for opinionmMining. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Common Sense Knowledge.Google Scholar
- Carletta, J. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: The kappa statistic. Computat. Linguis. 22, 2, 249--254. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chin, S., Street, N., Srinivasan, P., and Eichmann, D. 2010. Detecting Wikipedia vandalism with active learning and statistical language models. In Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Information Credibility. 3--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cohen, W. and Singer, Y. 1999. A simple, fast, and effective rule learner. In Proceedings of the 16th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Collier, A. 2011. A cyberbullying epidemic? No! Web log comment. http://www.netfamilynews.org/?p=30592.Google Scholar
- Cortes, C. and Vapnik, V. 1995. Support-vector networks. Machine Learn. 20. http://www.springerlink.com/content/k238jx04hm87j80g/. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dinakar, K., Reichart, R., and Lieberman, H. 2011. Modeling the detection of textual cyberbullying, In Proceedings of the International Conference on Weblog and Social Media (Social Mobile Web Workshop).Google Scholar
- Electronic Privacy Information Center. 2011. Google Privacy FAQ. http://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html.Google Scholar
- Gabrilovich, E. and Markovitch, S. 2004. Text categorization with many redundant features: Using aggressive feature selection to make SVMs competitive with C4.5. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Machine Learning. ACM, New York. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gao, Y. and Sun, S. 2010. An empirical evaluation of linear and nonlinear kernels for text classification using support vector machines. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery. 1502--1505.Google Scholar
- Goel, S. 2010. Design is a reflective practice: A summary of Schon’s views. Engineering & Computing Education: Reflectins and Ideation. Web post. http://goelsan.wordpress.com/2010/08/20/design-is-a-reflective-practice-a-summary-of-schons-views/.Google Scholar
- Gonçalves, T. and Quaresma, P. 2003. A preliminary approach to the multilabel classification problem of Portuguese juridical documents. In Proceedings of the 11th Portuguese Conference on Artificial Intelligence. F. Moura-Pires and S. Abreu Eds., Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2902, 435--444.Google Scholar
- Greevy, E. and Smeaton, A. F. 2004. Classifying racist texts using a support vector machine. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 468--469. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., and Witten, H. 2009. The WEKA data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explore Newsl. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hallnäs, L. and Redström, J. 2001. Slow technology; Designing for reflection. Personal Ubiquit. Comput. 5, 3, 201--212, Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Havasi, C., Speer, R., Pustejovsky, J., and Lieberman, L. 2009. Digital intuition: Applying common sense using dimensionality reduction. IEEE Intelligent Syst. Mag. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Heck, N. C., Flentje, A., and Cochran, B. N. 2011. Offsetting risks: High school gay-straight alliances and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. School Psychol. Quart 26, 2, 161--174.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. 2007. Offline consequences of online victimization: School violence and delinquency. J. School Violence 6, 3, 89--112.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hinduja, S. and Patchin, J. W. 2008. Cyberbullying: An exploratory analysis of factors related to offending and victimization. Deviant Behav. 29, 129--156.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ignizio, J. 1991. Introduction to Expert Systems. McGraw-Hill. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joachims, T. 1998. Text categorization with support vector machines: Learning with many relevant features. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Machine Learning. 137--142. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kontostathis, A., Edwards, L, and Leatherman, A. 2010. Text mining and cybercrime. In Text Mining: Applications and Theory, M. W. Berry and J. Kogan Eds., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Liu, H. and Singh, P. 2004. ConceptNet - A practical commonsense reasoning tool-kit. BT Technol. J. 22, 4, 211--226. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Madlock, P. and Westerman, D. 2011. Hurtful cyber-teasing and violence: Who’s laughing out loud? J. Interpersonal Violence 26, 17, 3542--3560.Google ScholarCross Ref
- McNely, B. 2009. Backchannel persistence and collaborative meaning-making. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication. ACM, New York, 297--304. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Menesini, E. and Nocentini, A. 2009. Cyberbullying definition and measurement: Some critical considerations. J. Psychol. 217, 230--232.Google Scholar
- Mey, J. 2001. Pragmatics: An Introduction. Blackwell, 76--77.Google Scholar
- Mishna, F., Saini, M., and Solomon, S. 2009. Ongoing and online: Children and youth’s perceptions of cyber bullying. Children Youth Services Rev. 31, 12, 1222--1228.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mishna, F., Cook, C., Gadalla, T., Daciuk, J., and Solomon, S. 2010. Cyber bullying behaviors among middle and high school students. Amer. J. Orthopsychiatry.Google Scholar
- Molich, R. and Nielsen, J. 1990. Improving a human-computer dialogue. Comm. ACM 33, 3, 338--348. Google ScholarDigital Library
- National Crime Prevention Council. 2007. Teens and cyberbullying. Executive summary. http://www.ncpc.org/resources/files/pdf/bullying/Teens%20and%20Cyberbullying%20Research%20Study.pdf.Google Scholar
- Neviarouskaya, A., Prendinger, H., and Ishizuka, M. 2009. Compositionality principle in recognition of fine-grained emotions from text. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Weblog and Social Media. AAAI Press, 278--281.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J. 2000. Why you only need to test with 5 users. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J. 2011. Ten usuabilty heuristics. http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html.Google Scholar
- Ol Weus, D. 1993. Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
- Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., and Foss, M. A. 1987. The referential structure of the affective lexicon. Cognitive Sci. 11, 3, 341--364.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ott, M., Choi, Y., Cardie, C., and Hancock, J. T. 2011. Finding deceptive opinion spam by any stretch of the imagination. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 309--319. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pang, B. and Lee, L. 2008. Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Found. Trends Info. Retriev. 2, 1--2, 1--135. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patchin, J. W. and Hinduja, S. 2012. Cyberbullying Prevention and Response: Expert Perspectives. Routledge, New York. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Quinlan, R. 1999. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rogati, M. and Yang, Y. 2002. High-performing feature selection for text classification. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sasaki, M. and Kita, K. 1998. Rule-based text categorization using hierarchical categories. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Vol. 3, 2827--2830.Google Scholar
- Schön D. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
- Sengers, P. 2005. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th Decennial Conference on Critical Computing. ACM Press, 49--58. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Singh, P., Lin, T., Mueller, T., Lim, G., Perkins, T., and Zhu, W. L. 2002. Open mind common sense: Knowledge acquisition from the general public. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2519, Springer, Berlin, 1223--1237. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sourander, A., Klomek, A. B., Ikonen, M., Lindroos, J., Luntamo, T., Koskelainen, M., Ristkari, T., and Helenius, H. 2010. Psychosocial risk factors associated with cyberbullying among adolescents: A population-based study. Arch Gen Psychiatry.Google Scholar
- Speer, R., Havasi, C., and Lieberman, H. 2008. AnalogySpace: Reducing the imensionality of common sense knowledge. In Proceedings of the 23rd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Vol. 1, A. Cohn Ed., AAAI Press, 548--553. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stop Cyberbullying. 2011. How to handle a cyberbully. http://www.stopcyberbullying.org/parents/howdoyouhandleacyberbully.html.Google Scholar
- Tong, S. and Koller, D. 2000. Support vector machine active learning with applications to text classification. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning. 999--1006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vala, M., Sequeira, P., Paiva, A., and Aylett, R. 2007. FearNot! demo: A virtual environment with synthetic characters to help bullying. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vandebosch H. and Cleemput, K. V. 2009. Cyberbullying among youngsters: Profiles of bullies and victims. New Media & Society 11, 1349--1371.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wall. 2011. How to use the Wall feature and Wall privacy. http://www.facebook.com/help/?page=174851209237562.Google Scholar
- Walther, J. B., Loh, T., and Granka, L. 2005. Let me count the ways: The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. J. Lang. Social Psychol. 24, 36--65.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ybarra, M. 2010. Trends in technology-based sexual and non-sexual aggression over time and linkages to non-technology aggression. National Summit on Interpersonal Violence and Abuse Across the Lifespan: Forging a Shared Agenda.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Common Sense Reasoning for Detection, Prevention, and Mitigation of Cyberbullying
Recommendations
Designing Cyberbullying Mitigation and Prevention Solutions through Participatory Design With Teenagers
CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsWhile social media platforms enable individuals to easily communicate and share experiences, they have also emerged as a tool for cyberbullying. Teenagers represent an especially vulnerable population for negative emotional responses to cyberbullying. ...
Common sense reasoning for detection, prevention, and mitigation of cyberbullying
IJCAI'15: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Artificial IntelligenceWe present an approach for cyberbullying detection based on state-of-the-art text classification and a common sense knowledge base, which permits recognition over a broad spectrum of topics in everyday life. We analyze a more narrow range of particular ...
Parental mediation, cyberbullying, and cybertrolling
Researchers are concerned with identifying the risk and protective factors associated with adolescents' involvement in cyberharassment. One such factor is parental mediation of children's electronic technology use. Little attention has been given to how ...
Comments