1,721,018 research outputs found
Crowdsourcing Statement Classification to Enhance Information Quality Prediction
No full textThis paper explores the use of crowdsourcing to classify statement types in film reviews to assess their information quality. Employing the Argument Type Identification Procedure which uses the Periodic Table of Arguments to categorize arguments, the study aims to connect statement types to the overall argument strength and information reliability. Focusing on non-expert annotators in a crowdsourcing environment, the research assesses their reliability based on various factors including language proficiency and annotation experience. Results indicate the importance of careful annotator selection and training to achieve high inter-annotator agreement and highlight challenges in crowdsourcing statement classification for information quality assessment
The Effects of Crowd Worker Biases in Fact-Checking Tasks
Full text linkDue to the increasing amount of information shared online every day, the need for sound and reliable ways of distinguishing between trustworthy and non-trustworthy information is as present as ever. One technique for performing fact-checking at scale is to employ human intelligence in the form of crowd workers. Although earlier work has suggested that crowd workers can reliably identify misinformation, cognitive biases of crowd workers may reduce the quality of truthfulness judgments in this context. We performed a systematic exploratory analysis of publicly available crowdsourced data to identify a set of potential systematic biases that may occur when crowd workers perform fact-checking tasks. Following this exploratory study, we collected a novel data set of crowdsourced truthfulness judgments to validate our hypotheses. Our findings suggest that workers generally overestimate the truthfulness of statements and that different individual characteristics (i.e., their belief in science) and cognitive biases (i.e., the affect heuristic and overconfidence) can affect their annotations. Interestingly, we find that, depending on the general judgment tendencies of workers, their biases may sometimes lead to more accurate judgments
SKG4J 2020: 1st international workshop on semantic and knowledge Graph advances for journalism
No full textCategorizing Review Helpfulness Using Abstract Dialectical Frameworks
Full text linkConsumer reviews are a vital aspect of the decision-making process for both buyers and companies in the era of e-commerce and online shopping. However, the helpfulness of reviews varies widely, and the abundance of available information can make it difficult to identify the most informative ones. Therefore, categorizing product reviews based on their helpfulness is a critical task. Review helpfulness can be determined by considering several features, such as readability, sentiment, word count, and coherence between the sentiment and score of a review. This article proposes a method for categorizing review helpfulness based on readability and coherence. Our approach employs abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), which use interpretation-based semantics to evaluate the acceptability of arguments. We tailor a specific ADF to each review to assess its helpfulness and provide clear explanations for our labeling decisions. We use the grounded semantics of ADFs, which provides information that no one can argue against, to justify our labels and enhance the value of our process. Our method can also be used as a system to give feedback to the review authors on why their reviews may not be helpful and how they can improve them in the future by considering readability and coherence factors. Moreover, our method can work on both small and large data-sets, which may not be feasible with machine learning methods that require a lot of training data.</p
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
