Dimensions of Online Conflict: Towards Modeling Agonism
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Agonism plays a vital role in democratic dialogue by fostering diverse perspectives and robust discussions. Within the realm of online conflict there is another type: hateful antagonism, which undermines constructive dialogue. Detecting conflict online is central to platform moderation and monetization. It is also vital for democratic dialogue, but only when it takes the form of agonism. To model these two types of conflict, we collected Twitter conversations related to trending controversial topics. We introduce a comprehensive annotation schema for labelling different dimensions of conflict in the conversations, such as the source of conflict, the target, and the rhetorical strategies deployed. Using this schema, we annotated approximately 4,000 conversations with multiple labels. We then trained both logistic regression and transformer-based models on the dataset, incorporating context from the conversation, including the number of participants and the structure of the interactions. Results show that contextual labels are helpful in identifying conflict and make the models robust to variations in topic. Our research contributes a conceptualization of different dimensions of conflict, a richly annotated dataset, and promising results that can contribute to content moderation.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Nov 2023.
Builds on
16 of 69 references.
References · 16
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2021Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias Toxic Language Detectioncited by 258
- 2020Directions in Abusive Language Training Data: Garbage In, Garbage Outcited by 139
- 2016Parsing Argumentation Structures in Persuasive Essayscited by 99
- 2018Conversations Gone Awry: Detecting Early Signs of Conversational Failurecited by 73
- 2021Agreeing to Disagree: Annotating Offensive Language Datasets with Annotators' Disagreementcited by 71
- 2018Sarcasm Analysis using Conversation Contextcited by 17
- 2017A Web of Hate: Tackling Hateful Speech in Online Social Spacescited by 15
- 2022The language of opinion change on social media under the lens of communicative actioncited by 12
- 2019Content Removal as a Moderation Strategy: Compliance and Other Outcomes in the ChangeMyView Communitycited by 9
- 2021From Toxicity in Online Comments to Incivility in American News: Proceed with Cautioncited by 8
4 more
- 2021Modeling the Severity of Complaints in Social Mediacited by 7
- 2023Hate Raids on Twitch: Echoes of the Past, New Modalities, and Implications for Platform Governancecited by 7
- 2020The Effect of Sociocultural Variables on Sarcasm Communication Onlinecited by 5
- 2021Not All Comments are Equal: Insights into Comment Moderation from a Topic-Aware Modelcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.