Do Differences in Values Influence Disagreements in Online Discussions? (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Disagreement is an important aspect of online discussions since it can drive novel ideas, incentivize evaluation of the proposed ideas, and avoid echo chambers. |
| Approach: | They propose to use human-annotated agreement labels to estimate personal values and to include value information in agreement prediction to improve performance. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models show that dissimilarity of value profiles correlates with disagreement in specific cases and that including value information in agreement prediction improves performance. |
Similar Papers
I Beg to Differ: A study of constructive disagreement in online conversations (2021.eacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Disagreements are pervasive in human communication. |
| Approach: | They construct a corpus of Wikipedia Talk page conversations that contain content disputes and define the task of predicting whether disagreements will be escalated to mediation by a moderator. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms feature-based models in predicting whether disagreements will escalate to mediation by a moderator. |
Investigating Human Values in Online Communities (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing value frameworks struggle with sample sizes and rely on selfreported surveys to calculate values. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to computationally analyse values on Reddit using in-domain and out-of-domain human annotations to train a value relevance and a polarity classifier. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method can be used to analyse values on reddit using human annotations and human annotation. |
Can Language Models Reason about Individualistic Human Values and Preferences? (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods and evaluation frameworks for achieving pluralistic alignment are limited by the diversity of people, which is pre-specified and coarsely categorized, papering over individuality. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset transformed from the influential World Values Survey to study language models on the specific challenge of individualistic value reasoning. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can predict individualistic values with accuracies between 55% and 65%, while a precise description of individualistic value judgments cannot be approximated only via demographic information. |
Evaluation and Facilitation of Online Discussions in the LLM Era: A Survey (2025.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Katerina Korre, Dimitris Tsirmpas, Nikos Gkoumas, Emma Cabalé, Danai Myrtzani, Theodoros Evgeniou, Ion Androutsopoulos, John Pavlopoulos
| Challenge: | Recent advances in LLMs enable artificial facilitation agents to not only moderate content, but also actively improve the quality of interactions. |
| Approach: | They propose a taxonomy on discussion quality evaluation and a new taxonomies for intervention and facilitation strategies. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods synthesize ideas from Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Social Sciences to provide a taxonomy on discussion quality evaluation, and a roadmap of good practices and future research directions. |
Investigating Reasons for Disagreement in Natural Language Inference (2022.tacl-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Several disagreements in natural language inference (NLI) annotation are due to uncertainty in the sentence meaning, others to annotator biases and task artifacts. |
| Approach: | They propose a 4-way classification approach and a multilabel classification approach for detecting disagreements in natural language inference annotations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model is more expressive and gives better recall of possible interpretations in the data. |
Dimensions of Online Conflict: Towards Modeling Agonism (2023.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Matt Canute, Mali Jin, Hannah Holtzclaw, Alberto Lusoli, Philippa Adams, Mugdha Pandya, Maite Taboada, Diana Maynard, Wendy Hui Kyong Chun
| Challenge: | agonism fosters robust discussions, but hateful antagonism undermines constructive dialogue . a new study analyzes Twitter conversations to identify different dimensions of conflict . |
| Approach: | They annotated Twitter conversations related to trending controversial topics to model conflict on a richly annotized dataset. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can help to moderate online conflicts and improve content monetization. |
I Know, but I Don’t Know! How Persona Conflict Undermines Instruction Adherence in Large Language Models (2026.findings-eacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies on persona-grounded dialogue assume idealized scenarios where persona and user utterances are fully aligned. |
| Approach: | They propose a taxonomy that categorizes model behaviors into three response types . they propose sycophantic, adherent, and wavering responses as response types. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework categorizes model behaviors into three response types and develops a measurement schema grounded in this taxonomy. |
The Pluralistic Moral Gap: Understanding Moral Judgment and Value Differences between Humans and Large Language Models (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing studies have shown that Large Language Models (LLMs) are not fully aligned with human moral judgments. |
| Approach: | They propose a dataset of 1,618 real-world moral dilemmas paired with a distribution of human moral judgments consisting of a binary evaluation and a free-text rationale to examine how closely LLMs align with human moral judgements. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model reproduces human judgments only under high consensus; alignment deteriorates sharply when human disagreement increases. |
A Corpus for Modeling User and Language Effects in Argumentation on Online Debating (P19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing argumentation datasets have allowed only limited assessment of "user" traits because information on background of users is generally unavailable. |
| Approach: | They present a dataset of 78,376 debates generated over a 10-year period along with surprisingly comprehensive participant profiles. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset includes 78,376 debates generated over a 10-year period along with comprehensive participant profiles. |
Do LLMs Align Human Values Regarding Social Biases? Judging and Explaining Social Biases with LLMs (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models can lead to undesired consequences when misaligned with human values . previous studies have shown misalignment of LLMs with human value using expert-designed or agent-based emulated bias scenarios . |
| Approach: | They investigate whether large language models (LLMs) are misaligned with human values . they find no significant differences in understanding of HVSB between LLMs . |
| Outcome: | The results show that large language models do not have lower misalignment rates and attack success rates . the study also shows that smaller language models have the ability to explain HVSB . |