Understanding Interpersonal Conflict Types and their Impact on Perception Classification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08758v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 10:39:35 GMT
• Title: Understanding Interpersonal Conflict Types and their Impact on Perception Classification
• Authors: Charles Welch, Joan Plepi, B\'ela Neuendorf, Lucie Flek
• Abstract summary: We use a novel annotation scheme and release a new dataset of situations and conflict aspect annotations. We then build a classifier to predict whether someone will perceive the actions of one individual as right or wrong in a given situation. Our findings have important implications for understanding conflict and social norms.
• Score: 7.907976678407914
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Studies on interpersonal conflict have a long history and contain many suggestions for conflict typology. We use this as the basis of a novel annotation scheme and release a new dataset of situations and conflict aspect annotations. We then build a classifier to predict whether someone will perceive the actions of one individual as right or wrong in a given situation, outperforming previous work on this task. Our analyses include conflict aspects, but also generated clusters, which are human validated, and show differences in conflict content based on the relationship of participants to the author. Our findings have important implications for understanding conflict and social norms.

Related papers

• NLP Case Study on Predicting the Before and After of the Ukraine-Russia and Hamas-Israel Conflicts [2.07180164747172]
  We propose a method to predict toxicity and other textual attributes through the use of natural language processing (NLP) techniques for two recent events. This article provides a basis for exploration in future conflicts with hopes to mitigate risk through the analysis of social media before and after a conflict begins.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T23:46:56Z)
• ECon: On the Detection and Resolution of Evidence Conflicts [56.89209046429291]
  The rise of large language models (LLMs) has significantly influenced the quality of information in decision-making systems. This study introduces a method for generating diverse, validated evidence conflicts to simulate real-world misinformation scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T07:41:17Z)
• AdaCAD: Adaptively Decoding to Balance Conflicts between Contextual and Parametric Knowledge [57.66282463340297]
  Knowledge conflict arises from discrepancies between information in the context of a large language model (LLM) and the knowledge stored in its parameters. We propose a fine-grained, instance-level approach called AdaCAD, which dynamically infers the weight of adjustment based on the degree of conflict.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-11T16:35:18Z)
• ConflictBank: A Benchmark for Evaluating the Influence of Knowledge Conflicts in LLM [36.332500824079844]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive advancements across numerous disciplines, yet the critical issue of knowledge conflicts has rarely been studied. We present ConflictBank, the first comprehensive benchmark developed to evaluate knowledge conflicts from three aspects. Our investigation delves into four model families and twelve LLM instances, meticulously analyzing conflicts stemming from misinformation, temporal discrepancies, and semantic divergences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T02:33:13Z)
• GRASP: A Disagreement Analysis Framework to Assess Group Associations in Perspectives [18.574420136899978]
  We propose GRASP, a comprehensive disagreement analysis framework to measure group association in perspectives among different rater sub-groups. Our framework reveals specific rater groups that have significantly different perspectives than others on certain tasks, and helps identify demographic axes that are crucial to consider in specific task contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-09T00:12:21Z)
• Dimensions of Online Conflict: Towards Modeling Agonism [2.471304332463658]
  Agonism plays a vital role in democratic dialogue by fostering diverse perspectives and robust discussions. 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T22:34:17Z)
• Rehearsal: Simulating Conflict to Teach Conflict Resolution [54.32934135393982]
  Rehearsal is a system that allows users to rehearse conflicts with a believable simulated interlocutor. Users can utilize Rehearsal to practice handling a variety of predefined conflict scenarios. Rehearsal uses IRP to generate utterances grounded in conflict resolution theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T17:59:20Z)
• Getting Sick After Seeing a Doctor? Diagnosing and Mitigating Knowledge Conflicts in Event Temporal Reasoning [87.92209048521153]
  Event temporal reasoning aims at identifying the temporal relations between two or more events from narratives. Knowledge conflicts arise when there is a mismatch between the actual temporal relations of events in the context and the prior knowledge or biases learned by the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T10:04:06Z)
• Fairness meets Cross-Domain Learning: a new perspective on Models and Metrics [80.07271410743806]
  We study the relationship between cross-domain learning (CD) and model fairness. We introduce a benchmark on face and medical images spanning several demographic groups as well as classification and localization tasks. Our study covers 14 CD approaches alongside three state-of-the-art fairness algorithms and shows how the former can outperform the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T09:34:05Z)
• Unifying Data Perspectivism and Personalization: An Application to Social Norms [10.480094567764606]
  We examine a corpus of social media posts about conflict from a set of 13k annotators and 210k judgements of social norms. We apply personalization methods to the modeling of annotators and compare their effectiveness for predicting the perception of social norms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-26T07:43:26Z)
• Adversarial Attacks and Defenses: An Interpretation Perspective [80.23908920686625]
  We review recent work on adversarial attacks and defenses, particularly from the perspective of machine learning interpretation. The goal of model interpretation, or interpretable machine learning, is to extract human-understandable terms for the working mechanism of models. For each type of interpretation, we elaborate on how it could be used for adversarial attacks and defenses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-23T23:19:00Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.