Words as Trigger Points in Social Media Discussions: A Large-Scale Case Study about UK Politics on Reddit

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10213v3
• Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 16:59:23 GMT
• Title: Words as Trigger Points in Social Media Discussions: A Large-Scale Case Study about UK Politics on Reddit
• Authors: Dimosthenis Antypas, Christian Arnold, Jose Camacho-Collados, Nedjma Ousidhoum, Carla Perez Almendros,
• Abstract summary: We suggest that trigger points are a useful concept to understand and model such behaviour.<n>In the original studies, individuals show strong and negative emotional responses when certain triggering words or topics are mentioned.<n>Our paper finds that these trigger points also exist in online debates.<n>Analysing the comments, we find that trigger words increase user engagement and animosity.
• Score: 6.995725875363227
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Political debates on social media sometimes flare up. From that moment on, users engage much more with one another; their communication is also more emotional and polarised. While it has been difficult to grasp such moments with computational methods, we suggest that trigger points are a useful concept to understand and ultimately model such behaviour. Established in qualitative focus group interviews to understand political polarisation (Mau, Lux, and Westheuser 2023), trigger points represent moments when individuals feel that their understanding of what is fair, normal, or appropriate in society is questioned. In the original studies, individuals show strong and negative emotional responses when certain triggering words or topics are mentioned. Our paper finds that these trigger points also exist in online debates. We examine online deliberations on Reddit between 2020 and 2022 and collect >100 million comments from subreddits related to a set of words identified as trigger points in UK politics. Analysing the comments, we find that trigger words increase user engagement and animosity, i.e., more negativity, hate speech, and controversial comments. Introducing trigger points to computational studies of online communication, our findings are relevant to researchers interested in affective computing, online deliberation, and how citizens debate politics and society in light of affective polarisation.

Related papers

• From Public Square to Echo Chamber: The Fragmentation of Online Discourse [0.1227734309612871]
  The study explores how digital platforms amplify discrimination discourse including sexism, racism, xenophobia, ableism, homophobia, and religious intolerance. The findings reveal how social media structures exacerbate polarization, cross group dialogue, and erode the collective reasoning essential for a just society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T15:53:58Z)
• Polarized Patterns of Language Toxicity and Sentiment of Debunking Posts on Social Media [5.301808480190602]
  The rise of misinformation and fake news in online political discourse poses significant challenges to democratic processes and public engagement. We examined over 86 million debunking tweets and more than 4 million Reddit debunking comments to investigate the relationship between language toxicity, pessimism, and social polarization in debunking efforts. We show that platform architecture affects informational complexity of user interactions, with Twitter promoting concentrated, uniform discourse and Reddit encouraging diverse, complex communication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T08:00:58Z)
• Toxic behavior silences online political conversations [0.0]
  We investigate the hypothesis that individuals may refrain from expressing minority opinions publicly due to being exposed to toxic behavior. Using hidden Markov models, we identify a latent state consistent with toxicity-driven silence. Our findings offer insights into the intricacies of online political deliberation and emphasize the importance of considering self-censorship dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-07T20:39:20Z)
• Understanding Online Discussion Across Difference: Insights from Gun Discourse on Reddit [41.40699123305595]
  We study discussions of gun policy on Reddit, with the overarching goal of developing insights into the potential of the internet to support understanding across difference. We find that the discussion of gun politics falls into three groups: conservative pro-gun, liberal pro-gun, and liberal anti-gun. While our subjects state that they would be willing to engage with others across the ideological divide, in practice they rarely do.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-06T02:36:27Z)
• Consolidating Strategies for Countering Hate Speech Using Persuasive Dialogues [3.8979646385036175]
  We explore controllable strategies for generating counter-arguments to hateful comments in online conversations. Using automatic and human evaluations, we determine the best combination of features that generate fluent, argumentative, and logically sound arguments. We share developed computational models for automatically annotating text with such features, and a silver-standard annotated version of an existing hate speech dialog corpora.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-15T16:31:18Z)
• The Face of Populism: Examining Differences in Facial Emotional Expressions of Political Leaders Using Machine Learning [50.24983453990065]
  We use a deep-learning approach to process a sample of 220 YouTube videos of political leaders from 15 different countries.<n>We observe statistically significant differences in the average score of negative emotions between groups of leaders with varying degrees of populist rhetoric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T18:32:49Z)
• CoSyn: Detecting Implicit Hate Speech in Online Conversations Using a Context Synergized Hyperbolic Network [52.85130555886915]
  CoSyn is a context-synergized neural network that explicitly incorporates user- and conversational context for detecting implicit hate speech in online conversations. We show that CoSyn outperforms all our baselines in detecting implicit hate speech with absolute improvements in the range of 1.24% - 57.8%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-02T17:30:43Z)
• Upvotes? Downvotes? No Votes? Understanding the relationship between reaction mechanisms and political discourse on Reddit [0.6767885381740952]
  This study investigates the relationship between social media reaction mechanisms and political rhetoric in user discussions. We analyze 155 million user comments in 55 political subforums on Reddit between 2010 and 2018. We find that political discourse theories describe political discussions on Reddit to a large extent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-19T11:12:45Z)
• Non-Polar Opposites: Analyzing the Relationship Between Echo Chambers and Hostile Intergroup Interactions on Reddit [66.09950457847242]
  We study the activity of 5.97M Reddit users and 421M comments posted over 13 years. We create a typology of relationships between political communities based on whether their users are toxic to each other.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-25T22:17:07Z)
• The language of opinion change on social media under the lens of communicative action [22.70882875813238]
  We identify key ingredients to opinion change by looking at more than 46k posts and more than 3.5M comments on Reddit's r/ChangeMyView. Among the various social dimensions, the ones that are most likely to produce an opinion change are knowledge, similarity, and trust. In line with theories of constructive conflict, our findings show that voicing conflict in the context of a structured public debate can promote integration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-31T11:35:06Z)
• Aggression and "hate speech" in communication of media users: analysis of control capabilities [50.591267188664666]
  Authors studied the possibilities of mutual influence of users in new media. They found a high level of aggression and hate speech when discussing an urgent social problem - measures for COVID-19 fighting. Results can be useful for developing media content in a modern digital environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-25T15:53:32Z)
• Persua: A Visual Interactive System to Enhance the Persuasiveness of Arguments in Online Discussion [52.49981085431061]
  Enhancing people's ability to write persuasive arguments could contribute to the effectiveness and civility in online communication. We derived four design goals for a tool that helps users improve the persuasiveness of arguments in online discussions. Persua is an interactive visual system that provides example-based guidance on persuasive strategies to enhance the persuasiveness of arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-16T08:07:53Z)
• Reaching the bubble may not be enough: news media role in online political polarization [58.720142291102135]
  A way of reducing polarization would be by distributing cross-partisan news among individuals with distinct political orientations. This study investigates whether this holds in the context of nationwide elections in Brazil and Canada.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T11:34:04Z)
• Perspective-taking and Pragmatics for Generating Empathetic Responses Focused on Emotion Causes [50.569762345799354]
  We argue that two issues must be tackled at the same time: (i) identifying which word is the cause for the other's emotion from his or her utterance and (ii) reflecting those specific words in the response generation. Taking inspiration from social cognition, we leverage a generative estimator to infer emotion cause words from utterances with no word-level label.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T04:22:49Z)
• Who Responded to Whom: The Joint Effects of Latent Topics and Discourse in Conversation Structure [53.77234444565652]
  We identify the responding relations in the conversation discourse, which link response utterances to their initiations. We propose a model to learn latent topics and discourse in word distributions, and predict pairwise initiation-response links. Experimental results on both English and Chinese conversations show that our model significantly outperforms the previous state of the arts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-17T17:46:00Z)
• How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum [0.0]
  We study the impact of opposing views within a major climate change skeptic online community on Reddit. We find that ideologically dissonant submissions act as a stimulant to activity in the community. Users who engaged with dissonant submissions were also more likely to return to the forum.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-12T13:39:00Z)
• Analysing Social Media Network Data with R: Semi-Automated Screening of Users, Comments and Communication Patterns [0.0]
  Communication on social media platforms is increasingly widespread across societies. Fake news, hate speech and radicalizing elements are part of this modern form of communication. A basic understanding of these mechanisms and communication patterns could help to counteract negative forms of communication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-26T14:52:01Z)
• "Nice Try, Kiddo": Investigating Ad Hominems in Dialogue Responses [87.89632038677912]
  Ad hominem attacks are those that target some feature of a person's character instead of the position the person is maintaining. We propose categories of ad hominems, compose an annotated dataset, and build a system to analyze human and dialogue responses to English Twitter posts. Our results indicate that 1) responses from both humans and DialoGPT contain more ad hominems for discussions around marginalized communities, 2) different quantities of ad hominems in the training data can influence the likelihood of generating ad hominems, and 3) we can constrained decoding techniques to reduce ad hominems
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T07:37:49Z)
• Predicting User Emotional Tone in Mental Disorder Online Communities [2.365702128814616]
  We analyze how discussions in Reddit communities related to mental disorders can help improve the health conditions of their users. Using the emotional tone of users' writing as a proxy for emotional state, we uncover relationships between user interactions and state changes. We build models based on SOTA text embedding techniques and RNNs to predict shifts in emotional tone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-15T11:25:08Z)
• What Changed Your Mind: The Roles of Dynamic Topics and Discourse in Argumentation Process [78.4766663287415]
  This paper presents a study that automatically analyzes the key factors in argument persuasiveness. We propose a novel neural model that is able to track the changes of latent topics and discourse in argumentative conversations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-10T04:27:48Z)

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.