Revisiting Contextual Toxicity Detection in Conversations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding toxicity in user conversations is undoubtedly an important problem. Addressing "covert" or implicit cases of toxicity is particularly hard and requires context. Very few previous studies have analysed the influence of conversational context in human perception or in automated detection models. We dive deeper into both these directions. We start by analysing existing contextual datasets and come to the conclusion that toxicity labelling by humans is in general influenced by the conversational structure, polarity and topic of the context. We then propose to bring these findings into computational detection models by introducing and evaluating (a) neural architectures for contextual toxicity detection that are aware of the conversational structure, and (b) data augmentation strategies that can help model contextual toxicity detection. Our results have shown the encouraging potential of neural architectures that are aware of the conversation structure. We have also demonstrated that such models can benefit from synthetic data, especially in the social media domain.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Nov 2021.
Builds on
30 of 48 references.
References · 30
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
- 2014Conditional Generative Adversarial Netscited by 2,152
- 2017Decoupled Weight Decay Regularizationcited by 1,722
- 2019EDA: Easy Data Augmentation Techniques for Boosting Performance on Text Classification Taskscited by 800
- 2015Improving Neural Machine Translation Models with Monolingual Datacited by 784
- 2020The Hateful Memes Challenge: Detecting Hate Speech in Multimodal Memescited by 485
- 2018Large Scale Crowdsourcing and Characterization of Twitter Abusive Behaviorcited by 265
- 2019The Second Conversational Intelligence Challenge (ConvAI2)cited by 178
- 2019Build it Break it Fix it for Dialogue Safety: Robustness from Adversarial Human Attackcited by 176
- 2020SemEval-2020 Task 12: Multilingual Offensive Language Identification in Social Media (OffensEval 2020)cited by 138
18 more
- 2019A Benchmark Dataset for Learning to Intervene in Online Hate Speechcited by 128
- 2017Understanding Abuse: A Typology of Abusive Language Detection Subtaskscited by 115
- 2019Exploring Hate Speech Detection in Multimodal Publicationscited by 103
- 2020Toxicity Detection: Does Context Really Matter?cited by 93
- 2019Style Transformer: Unpaired Text Style Transfer without Disentangled Latent Representationcited by 84
- 2021Human-in-the-Loop for Data Collection: a Multi-Target Counter Narrative Dataset to Fight Online Hate Speechcited by 81
- 2017Detecting Online Hate Speech Using Context Aware Modelscited by 72
- 2018Fighting Offensive Language on Social Media with Unsupervised Text Style Transfercited by 55
- 2019A Just and Comprehensive Strategy for Using NLP to Address Online Abusecited by 49
- 2020Data Boost: Text Data Augmentation Through Reinforcement Learning Guided Conditional Generationcited by 47
- 2019Trouble on the Horizon: Forecasting the Derailment of Online Conversations as they Developcited by 41
- 2019Data Augmentation for BERT Fine-Tuning in Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 21
- 2021Abuse is Contextual, What about NLP? The Role of Context in Abusive Language Annotation and Detectioncited by 19
- 2021How Does Counterfactually Augmented Data Impact Models for Social Computing Constructs?cited by 19
- 2021I Beg to Differ: A study of constructive disagreement in online conversationscited by 18
- 2016Conversational Markers of Constructive Discussionscited by 17
- 2017"Like Sheep Among Wolves": Characterizing Hateful Users on Twittercited by 8
- 2021HBert + BiasCorp -- Fighting Racism on the Webcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
8 papers.
- 2023People Make Better Edits: Measuring the Efficacy of LLM-Generated Counterfactually Augmented Data for Harmful Language Detectioncited by 25
- 2023A Taxonomy of Rater Disagreements: Surveying Challenges & Opportunities from the Perspective of Annotating Online Toxicitycited by 4
- 2024Putting Context in Context: the Impact of Discussion Structure on Text Classificationcited by 3
- 2023Conversation Modeling to Predict Derailmentcited by 2
- 2025Graphically Speaking: Unmasking Abuse in Social Media with Conversation Insightscited by 1
- 2025Combating Toxic Language: A Review of LLM-Based Strategies for Software Engineeringcited by 1
- 2024The Unappreciated Role of Intent in Algorithmic Moderation of Social Media Contentcited by 0
- 2026CIG: Measuring Conversational Information Gain in Deliberative Dialogues with Semantic Memory Dynamicscited by 0
- 2026CIG: Measuring Conversational Information Gain in Deliberative Dialogues with Semantic Memory Dynamics17 Apr 2026
- 2025Combating Toxic Language: A Review of LLM-Based Strategies for Software Engineering21 Apr 2025
- 2025Graphically Speaking: Unmasking Abuse in Social Media with Conversation Insights2 Apr 2025
- 2024The Unappreciated Role of Intent in Algorithmic Moderation of Social Media Content17 May 2024
- 2024Putting Context in Context: the Impact of Discussion Structure on Text Classification5 Feb 2024
- 2023A Taxonomy of Rater Disagreements: Surveying Challenges & Opportunities from the Perspective of Annotating Online Toxicity7 Nov 2023
- 2023People Make Better Edits: Measuring the Efficacy of LLM-Generated Counterfactually Augmented Data for Harmful Language Detection2 Nov 2023
- 2023Conversation Modeling to Predict Derailment20 Mar 2023