Can NLP Tackle Hate Speech in the Real World? Stakeholder-Informed Feedback and Survey on Counterspeech

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.04638v1
• Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2025 17:04:58 GMT
• Title: Can NLP Tackle Hate Speech in the Real World? Stakeholder-Informed Feedback and Survey on Counterspeech
• Authors: Tanvi Dinkar, Aiqi Jiang, Simona Frenda, Poppy Gerrard-Abbott, Nancie Gunson, Gavin Abercrombie, Ioannis Konstas,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a systematic review of 74 NLP studies on counterspeech.<n>We analyse the extent to which stakeholder participation influences dataset creation, model development, and evaluation.<n>Our findings reveal a growing disconnect between current NLP research and the needs of communities most impacted by toxic online content.
• Score: 9.25125378244369
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Counterspeech, i.e. the practice of responding to online hate speech, has gained traction in NLP as a promising intervention. While early work emphasised collaboration with non-governmental organisation stakeholders, recent research trends have shifted toward automated pipelines that reuse a small set of legacy datasets, often without input from affected communities. This paper presents a systematic review of 74 NLP studies on counterspeech, analysing the extent to which stakeholder participation influences dataset creation, model development, and evaluation. To complement this analysis, we conducted a participatory case study with five NGOs specialising in online Gender-Based Violence (oGBV), identifying stakeholder-informed practices for counterspeech generation. Our findings reveal a growing disconnect between current NLP research and the needs of communities most impacted by toxic online content. We conclude with concrete recommendations for re-centring stakeholder expertise in counterspeech research.

Related papers

• What is the social benefit of hate speech detection research? A Systematic Review [0.0]
  We argue the absence of ethical frameworks have contributed to this rift between current practice and best practice. By adopting appropriate ethical frameworks, NLP researchers may enable the social impact potential of hate speech research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T01:57:27Z)
• From Insights to Actions: The Impact of Interpretability and Analysis Research on NLP [28.942812379900673]
  Interpretability and analysis (IA) research is a growing subfield within NLP. We seek to quantify the impact of IA research on the broader field of NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T13:45:07Z)
• What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
  In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
• NLP for Counterspeech against Hate: A Survey and How-To Guide [11.696212004806263]
  We provide a guide for doing research on counterspeech, by describing - with detailed examples - the steps to undertake. We discuss open challenges and future directions of counterspeech research in NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-29T10:32:44Z)
• Responsible AI Considerations in Text Summarization Research: A Review of Current Practices [89.85174013619883]
  We focus on text summarization, a common NLP task largely overlooked by the responsible AI community. We conduct a multi-round qualitative analysis of 333 summarization papers from the ACL Anthology published between 2020-2022. We focus on how, which, and when responsible AI issues are covered, which relevant stakeholders are considered, and mismatches between stated and realized research goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T15:35:36Z)
• Surveying (Dis)Parities and Concerns of Compute Hungry NLP Research [75.84463664853125]
  We provide a first attempt to quantify concerns regarding three topics, namely, environmental impact, equity, and impact on peer reviewing. We capture existing (dis)parities between different and within groups with respect to seniority, academia, and industry. We devise recommendations to mitigate found disparities, some of which already successfully implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-29T12:44:53Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation for Conversational Recommendation in the Era of Large Language Models [115.7508325840751]
  The recent success of large language models (LLMs) has shown great potential to develop more powerful conversational recommender systems (CRSs) In this paper, we embark on an investigation into the utilization of ChatGPT for conversational recommendation, revealing the inadequacy of the existing evaluation protocol. We propose an interactive Evaluation approach based on LLMs named iEvaLM that harnesses LLM-based user simulators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T15:12:43Z)
• NLPeer: A Unified Resource for the Computational Study of Peer Review [58.71736531356398]
  We introduce NLPeer -- the first ethically sourced multidomain corpus of more than 5k papers and 11k review reports from five different venues. We augment previous peer review datasets to include parsed and structured paper representations, rich metadata and versioning information. Our work paves the path towards systematic, multi-faceted, evidence-based study of peer review in NLP and beyond.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-12T12:29:38Z)
• What Do NLP Researchers Believe? Results of the NLP Community Metasurvey [43.763865378178245]
  We present the results of the NLP Community Metasurvey. The survey elicited opinions on controversial issues. We find false sociological beliefs where the community's predictions don't match reality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-26T19:45:51Z)
• Fragments of the Past: Curating Peer Support with Perpetrators of Domestic Violence [88.37416552778178]
  We report on a ten-month study where we worked with six support workers and eighteen perpetrators in the design and deployment of Fragments of the Past. We share how crafting digitally-augmented artefacts - 'fragments' - of experiences of desisting from violence can translate messages for motivation and rapport between peers. These insights provide the basis for practical considerations for future network design with challenging populations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-09T22:57:43Z)
• Sentiment Analysis Based on Deep Learning: A Comparative Study [69.09570726777817]
  The study of public opinion can provide us with valuable information. The efficiency and accuracy of sentiment analysis is being hindered by the challenges encountered in natural language processing. This paper reviews the latest studies that have employed deep learning to solve sentiment analysis problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-05T16:28:10Z)

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.