Quantifying Controversy in Social Media
Abstract
Which topics spark the most heated debates on social media? Identifying those topics is not only interesting from a societal point of view, but also allows the filtering and aggregation of social media content for disseminating news stories. In this paper, we perform a systematic methodological study of controversy detection by using the content and the network structure of social media. Unlike previous work, rather than study controversy in a single hand-picked topic and use domain specific knowledge, we take a general approach to study topics in any domain. Our approach to quantifying controversy is based on a graph-based three-stage pipeline, which involves (i) building a conversation graph about a topic; (ii) partitioning the conversation graph to identify potential sides of the controversy; and (iii) measuring the amount of controversy from characteristics of the graph. We perform an extensive comparison of controversy measures, different graph-building approaches, and data sources. We use both controversial and non-controversial topics on Twitter, as well as other external datasets. We find that our new random-walk-based measure outperforms existing ones in capturing the intuitive notion of controversy, and show that content features are vastly less helpful in this task.
Cite
@article{arxiv.1507.05224,
title = {Quantifying Controversy in Social Media},
author = {Kiran Garimella and Gianmarco De Francisci Morales and Aristides Gionis and Michael Mathioudakis},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.05224},
year = {2017}
}
Comments
Accepted in the journal Transactions on Social Computing (TSC). Extended version of the WSDM 2016 and CSCW 2016 demo paper. Please cite the TSC/WSDM version and not the arxiv version