Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

The Media Bias Taxonomy: A Systematic Literature Review on the Forms and Automated Detection of Media Bias (2312.16148v3)

Published 26 Dec 2023 in cs.CL

Abstract: The way the media presents events can significantly affect public perception, which in turn can alter people's beliefs and views. Media bias describes a one-sided or polarizing perspective on a topic. This article summarizes the research on computational methods to detect media bias by systematically reviewing 3140 research papers published between 2019 and 2022. To structure our review and support a mutual understanding of bias across research domains, we introduce the Media Bias Taxonomy, which provides a coherent overview of the current state of research on media bias from different perspectives. We show that media bias detection is a highly active research field, in which transformer-based classification approaches have led to significant improvements in recent years. These improvements include higher classification accuracy and the ability to detect more fine-granular types of bias. However, we have identified a lack of interdisciplinarity in existing projects, and a need for more awareness of the various types of media bias to support methodologically thorough performance evaluations of media bias detection systems. Concluding from our analysis, we see the integration of recent machine learning advancements with reliable and diverse bias assessment strategies from other research areas as the most promising area for future research contributions in the field.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (253)
  1. 1967. Second Conference Internationale Sur Le Traitement Automatique Des Langues, COLING 1967, Grenoble, France, August 1967. https://aclanthology.org/volumes/C67-1/
  2. An Information Theory Approach to Detect Media Bias in News Websites. (2020), 9.
  3. Improving Hate Speech Detection of Urdu Tweets Using Sentiment Analysis. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 84296–84305. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3087827
  4. Emily Allaway and Kathleen McKeown. 2021. A Unified Feature Representation for Lexical Connotations. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online, 2145–2163. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.184
  5. The impact of newspapers on consumer confidence: does spin bias exist? Applied Economics 40, 5 (2008), 531–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840600707100
  6. Khudran Alzhrani. 2020. Ideology Detection of Personalized Political News Coverage: A New Dataset. In Proceedings of the 2020 the 4th International Conference on Compute and Data Analysis (Silicon Valley CA USA). ACM, 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3388142.3388149
  7. GenderQuant: Quantifying Mention-Level Genderedness. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North (Minneapolis, Minnesota). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2959–2969. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1303
  8. Talita Anthonio and Lennart Kloppenburg. 2019. Team Kermit-the-frog at SemEval-2019 Task 4: Bias Detection Through Sentiment Analysis and Simple Linguistic Features. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA). Association for Computational Linguistics, 1016–1020. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/S19-2177
  9. ExT5: Towards Extreme Multi-Task Scaling for Transfer Learning. CoRR abs/2111.10952 (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.10952
  10. The Gender Gap Tracker: Using Natural Language Processing to measure gender bias in media. PLOS ONE 16, 1 (01 2021), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245533
  11. Larry Atkins. 2016. Skewed: A Critical Thinker’s Guide to Media Bias. Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York.
  12. Stereotypical Bias Removal for Hate Speech Detection Task using Knowledge-based Generalizations. In The World Wide Web Conference on - WWW ’19 (San Francisco, CA, USA). ACM Press, 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3313504
  13. Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 37 (2018), 9216–9221. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115
  14. What Was Written vs. Who Read It: News Media Profiling Using Text Analysis and Social Media Context. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 3364–3374. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.308
  15. Multi-Task Ordinal Regression for Jointly Predicting the Trustworthiness and the Leading Political Ideology of News Media. arXiv:1904.00542 [cs, stat] http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.00542
  16. We Can Detect Your Bias: Predicting the Political Ideology of News Articles. arXiv:2010.05338 [cs] http://arxiv.org/abs/2010.05338
  17. Politically Motivated Selective Exposure and Perceived Media Bias. Communication Research 47, 1 (2020), 82–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217713066
  18. A Signal Detection Approach to Understanding the Identification of Fake News. Perspectives on Psychological Science 17, 1 (2022), 78–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620986135 PMID: 34264150.
  19. Analyzing the Limits of Self-Supervision in Handling Bias in Language. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2022. Association for Computational Linguistics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 7372–7386. https://aclanthology.org/2022.findings-emnlp.545
  20. Matthew A. Baum and Phil Gussin. 2008. In the Eye of the Beholder: How Information Shortcuts Shape Individual Perceptions of Bias in the Media. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 3, 1 (2008), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00007010
  21. Testing and Comparing Computational Approaches for Identifying the Language of Framing in Political News. In Human Language Technologies: The 2015 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL. Denver, Colorado, 1472–1482,. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/N15-1171
  22. Efficient Tree-based Approximation for Entailment Graph Learning. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Jeju Island, Korea, 117–125. https://aclanthology.org/P12-1013
  23. Camiel J. Beukeboom and Christian Burgers. 2017. Linguistic Bias. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.439
  24. Investigating Gender Bias in BERT. Cognitive Computation 13, 4 (2021), 1008–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12559-021-09881-2
  25. OtherTube: Facilitating Content Discovery and Reflection by Exchanging YouTube Recommendations with Strangers. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New Orleans, LA, USA) (CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 204, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502028
  26. Ciara Blackledge and Amir Atapour-Abarghouei. 2021. Transforming Fake News: Robust Generalisable News Classification Using Transformers. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2109.09796
  27. Fernando Blanco. 2017. Cognitive Bias. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1244-1
  28. Shikha Bordia and Samuel R. Bowman. 2019. Identifying and Reducing Gender Bias in Word-Level Language Models. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North (Minneapolis, Minnesota). Association for Computational Linguistics, 7–15. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-3002
  29. Selection Bias in News Coverage: Learning it, Fighting it. In Companion of the The Web Conference 2018 on The Web Conference 2018 - WWW ’18 (Lyon, France). ACM Press, 535–543. https://doi.org/10.1145/3184558.3188724
  30. Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain. Journal of Systems and Software 80, 4 (2007), 571–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2006.07.009
  31. Fair and Balanced? Quantifying Media Bias through Crowdsourced Content Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly 80, S1 (04 2016), 250–271. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw007
  32. Framing the Fight: An Analysis of Media Coverage of Female and Male Candidates in Primary Races for Governor and U.S. Senate in 2000. American Behavioral Scientist 44, 12 (2001), 1999–2013. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121958456
  33. Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science 356, 6334 (April 2017), 183–186. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal4230
  34. Whose media are hostile? The spillover effect of interpersonal discussions on media bias perceptions. Communications (2020), 000010151520190140. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-0140
  35. ENTRUST: Argument Reframing with Language Models and Entailment. arXiv:2103.06758 [cs.CL]
  36. Neutral bots probe political bias on social media. 12, 1 (2021), 5580. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25738-6
  37. Detecting Media Bias in News Articles using Gaussian Bias Distributions. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020 (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 4290–4300. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.findings-emnlp.383
  38. Analyzing Political Bias and Unfairness in News Articles at Different Levels of Granularity. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Natural Language Processing and Computational Social Science (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 149–154. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.nlpcss-1.16
  39. An Automated Framework to Identify and Eliminate Systemic Racial Bias in the Media. CEUR Workshop Proceedings 2812 (02 [n. d.]), 32–36. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2812/
  40. Uthsav Chitra and Christopher Musco. 2020. Analyzing the Impact of Filter Bubbles on Social Network Polarization. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (Houston TX USA). ACM, 115–123. https://doi.org/10.1145/3336191.3371825
  41. A Computational Analysis of News Media Bias: A South African Case Study. In Proceedings of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists 2019 on ZZZ - SAICSIT ’19 (Skukuza, South Africa). ACM Press, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351108.3351134
  42. An affirmed self and an open mind: Self-affirmation and sensitivity to argument strength. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40, 3 (2004), 350–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.07.001
  43. Marta Costa-jussa. 2019. An analysis of gender bias studies in natural language processing. Nature Machine Intelligence 1 (11 2019), 495–496. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0105-5
  44. On document representations for detection of biased news articles. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Brno Czech Republic). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 892–899. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341105.3374025
  45. LUC at ComMA-2021 Shared Task: Multilingual Gender Biased and Communal Language Identification without using linguistic features. arXiv:2112.10189 [cs] http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.10189
  46. Jamell Dacon and Haochen Liu. 2021. Does Gender Matter in the News? Detecting and Examining Gender Bias in News Articles. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 (Ljubljana Slovenia). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442442.3452325
  47. Dave D’Alessio and Mike Allen. 2000. Media Bias in Presidential Elections: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Communication 50, 4 (01 2000), 133–156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x
  48. Media Bias in German Online Newspapers. In HT ’15.
  49. Samantha D’Alonzo and Max Tegmark. 2021. Machine-Learning media bias. arXiv:2109.00024 [cs] http://arxiv.org/abs/2109.00024
  50. Partisan Cues and the Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presidential Election. The American Political Science Review 92, 1 (1998), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585932
  51. Automated Hate Speech Detection and the Problem of Offensive Language. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 11, 1 (05 2017), 512–515. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v11i1.14955
  52. Analysing Bias in Political News. 26, 2 (2020), 173–199. https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.2020.011
  53. Claes H. de Vreese. 2005. News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal 13, 1 (2005), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
  54. The truth about the truth: A meta-analytic review of the truth effect. Personality 10.1073/pnas.1517441113 Social Psychology Review 14 (2010), 238–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309352251
  55. Mapping social dynamics on Facebook: The Brexit debate. Social Networks 50 (2017), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017.02.002
  56. Predicting the Leading Political Ideology of YouTube Channels Using Acoustic, Textual, and Metadata Information. In Interspeech 2019. ISCA, 501–505. https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2019-2965
  57. A Survey of Natural Language Generation. ACM Comput. Surv. (jul 2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3554727
  58. Evidence of Linguistic Intergroup Bias in U.S. Print News Coverage of Immigration. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 36, 4 (2017), 462–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X16666884
  59. No Need to Watch: How the Effects of Partisan Media Can Spread via Interpersonal Discussions. American Journal of Political Science 62, 1 (2018), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/TJKIWN
  60. James N. Druckman and Michael Parkin. 2005. The Impact of Media Bias: How Editorial Slant Affects Voters. The Journal of Politics 67, 4 (2005), 1030–1049. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00349.x
  61. Elizabeth Dubois and Grant Blank. 2018. The echo chamber is overstated: the moderating effect of political interest and diverse media. Information, Communication & Society 21, 5 (2018), 729–745. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1428656
  62. Why Do Partisan Audiences Participate? Perceived Public Opinion as the Mediating Mechanism. Communication Research 45, 1 (2018), 112–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215593145
  63. Jana Laura Egelhofer and Sophie Lecheler. 2019. Fake news as a two-dimensional phenomenon: a framework and research agenda. Annals of the International Communication Association 43, 2 (2019), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1602782
  64. Kenneth C. Enevoldsen and Lasse Hansen. 2017. Analysing Political Biases in Danish Newspapers Using Sentiment Analysis. Journal of Language Works - Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift 2, 2 (07 2017), 87–98. https://tidsskrift.dk/lwo/article/view/96014
  65. Robert M. Entman. 2007. Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. Journal of Communication 57, 1 (02 2007), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x
  66. Robert M. Entman. 2010. Media framing biases and political power: Explaining slant in news of Campaign 2008. Journalism 11, 4 (2010), 389–408.
  67. William P. Eveland Jr. and Dhavan V. Shah. 2003. The Impact of Individual and Interpersonal Factors on Perceived News Media Bias. Political Psychology 24, 1 (2003), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00318
  68. Jody Condit Fagan. 2017. An Evidence-Based Review of Academic Web Search Engines, 2014-2016: Implications for Librarians’ Practice and Research Agenda. Information Technology and Libraries 36, 2 (Jun. 2017), 7–47. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v36i2.9718
  69. Tiziano Fagni and Stefano Cresci. 2022. Fine-grained Prediction of Political Leaning on Social Media with Unsupervised Deep Learning. 73 (2022), 633–672. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.1.13112
  70. In Plain Sight: Media Bias Through the Lens of Factual Reporting. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP) (Hong Kong, China). Association for Computational Linguistics, 6342–6348. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1664
  71. Shirtless and dangerous: Quantifying linguistic signals of gender bias in an online fiction writing community. In Tenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.
  72. Discovering and Categorising Language Biases in Reddit. (2020). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2008.02754
  73. Leon Festinger. 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Vol. 2. Stanford university press.
  74. Anjalie Field and Yulia Tsvetkov. 2020. Unsupervised Discovery of Implicit Gender Bias. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 596–608. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.44
  75. Selective exposure to information: the impact of information limits. European Journal of Social Psychology 35, 4 (2005), 469–492. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.264
  76. Academic Plagiarism Detection: A Systematic Literature Review. ACM Comput. Surv. 52, 6, Article 112 (Oct. 2019), 42 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3345317
  77. Johan Galtung and Mari Holmboe Ruge. 1965. The Structure of Foreign News: The Presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers. Journal of Peace Research 2, 1 (1965), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234336500200104
  78. Detecting Political Bias in News Articles Using Headline Attention. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACL Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP. Association for Computational Linguistics, Florence, Italy, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-4809
  79. Empirical Evaluation of Three Common Assumptions in Building Political Media Bias Datasets. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, ICWSM 2020, Held Virtually, Original Venue: Atlanta, Georgia, USA, June 8-11, 2020, Munmun De Choudhury, Rumi Chunara, Aron Culotta, and Brooke Foucault Welles (Eds.). AAAI Press, 939–943. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7362
  80. Target-Dependent Sentiment Classification With BERT. IEEE Access 7 (2019), 154290–154299. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2946594
  81. R. Kelly Garrett. 2009. Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate. Journal of Communication 59, 4 (2009), 676–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.x
  82. Bertram Gawronski. 2021. Partisan bias in the identification of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 25, 9 (2021), 723–724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.05.001
  83. Hostile media bias on social media: Testing the effect of user comments on perceptions of news bias and credibility. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies 2, 2 (2020), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.185
  84. Gerald Ki Wei Huang and Jun Choi Lee. 2021. Hyperpartisan News Classification with ELMo and Bias Feature. 37, 5 (2021). https://doi.org/10.6688/JISE.202109_37(5).0013
  85. Sarah Gershon. 2012. When Race, Gender, and the Media Intersect: Campaign News Coverage of Minority Congresswomen. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 33, 2 (2012), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554477X.2012.667743
  86. Bryan T. Gervais. 2015. Incivility Online: Affective and Behavioral Reactions to Uncivil Political Posts in a Web-based Experiment. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 12, 2 (2015), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2014.997416
  87. Carroll J. Glynn and Michael E. Huge. 2014. How Pervasive Are Perceptions of Bias? Exploring Judgments of Media Bias in Financial News. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 26, 4 (02 2014), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edu004
  88. Seth K. Goldman and Diana C. Mutz. 2011. The Friendly Media Phenomenon: A Cross-National Analysis of Cross-Cutting Exposure. Political Communication 28, 1 (2011), 42–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2010.544280
  89. Melanie C. Green and Timothy C. Brock. 2005. Persuasiveness of Narratives. In Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives, 2nd ed. Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, US, 117–142.
  90. Stephan Greene and Philip Resnik. 2009. More than Words: Syntactic Packaging and Implicit Sentiment. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, Boulder, Colorado, 503–511. https://aclanthology.org/N09-1057
  91. Tim Groseclose and Jeffrey Milyo. 2005. A social‐science perspective on media bias. Critical Review 17, 3-4 (2005), 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913810508443641
  92. Characterizing political bias and comments associated with news on Brazilian Facebook. 11, 1 (2021), 94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-021-00806-3
  93. Albert C. Gunther and Janice L. Liebhart. 2006. Broad Reach or Biased Source? Decomposing the Hostile Media Effect. Journal of Communication 56, 3 (2006), 449–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00295.x
  94. Albert C. Gunther and Kathleen Schmitt. 2004. Mapping Boundaries of the Hostile Media Effect. Journal of Communication 54, 1 (2004), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02613.x
  95. Shijia Guo and Kenny Q. Zhu. 2022. Modeling Multi-level Context for Informational Bias Detection by Contrastive Learning and Sentential Graph Network. arXiv:2201.10376 [cs] http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.10376
  96. Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph. 2004. Intuitive Ethics: How Innately Prepared Intuitions Generate Culturally Variable Virtues. Daedalus 133, 4 (2004), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526042365555
  97. Felix Hamborg and Karsten Donnay. 2021. NewsMTSC: A Dataset for (Multi-)Target-dependent Sentiment Classification in Political News Articles. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume. Association for Computational Linguistics, Online, 1663–1675. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.142
  98. Automated identification of media bias in news articles: an interdisciplinary literature review. International Journal on Digital Libraries 20, 4 (01 Dec 2019), 391–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-018-0261-y
  99. The Fallacy of Echo Chambers: Analyzing the Political Slants of User-Generated News Comments in Korean Media. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Noisy User-generated Text (W-NUT 2019) (Hong Kong, China). Association for Computational Linguistics, 370–374. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-5548
  100. Abdelhakim Hannousse. 2021. Searching relevant papers for software engineering secondary studies: Semantic Scholar coverage and identification role. IET Software 15, 1 (2021), 126–146. https://doi.org/10.1049/sfw2.12011
  101. Glenn J. Hansen and Hyunjung Kim. 2011. Is the Media Biased Against Me? A Meta-Analysis of the Hostile Media Effect Research. Communication Research Reports 28, 2 (2011), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.565280
  102. Tilo Hartmann and Martin Tanis. 2013. Examining the hostile media effect as an intergroup phenomenon: The role of ingroup identification and status. Journal of Communication 63, 3 (2013), 535–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12031
  103. Detect and Perturb: Neutral Rewriting of Biased and Sensitive Text via Gradient-based Decoding. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021 (Punta Cana, Dominican Republic). Association for Computational Linguistics, 4173–4181. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.352
  104. Talking Politics: The Relationship Between Supportive and Opposing Discussion With Partisan Media Credibility and Use. Communication Research 49, 2 (2022), 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650220915041
  105. Modeling Ideological Agenda Setting and Framing in Polarized Online Groups with Graph Neural Networks and Structured Sparsity. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2104.08829
  106. Joan B. Hooper. 1975. On Assertive Predicates. Brill, Leiden, Niederlande, 91 – 124. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368828_005
  107. Influence of User Comments on Perceptions of Media Bias and Third-Person Effect in Online News. Electronic News 5, 2 (2011), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1931243111407618
  108. Christoph Hube. 2020. Methods for detecting and mitigating linguistic bias in text corpora. (2020). https://doi.org/10.15488/9873 Publisher: Hannover : Institutionelles Repositorium der Leibniz Universität Hannover.
  109. Christoph Hube and Besnik Fetahu. 2018. Detecting Biased Statements in Wikipedia. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018 (WWW ’18). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE, 1779–1786. https://doi.org/10.1145/3184558.3191640
  110. Christoph Hube and Besnik Fetahu. 2019. Neural Based Statement Classification for Biased Language. In Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (Melbourne VIC Australia). ACM, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1145/3289600.3291018
  111. Us vs. Them: A Dataset of Populist Attitudes, News Bias and Emotions. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 1921–1945. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.165
  112. Ken Hyland. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. A&C Black.
  113. Rami Ibrahim and M. Omair Shafiq. 2022. Explainable Convolutional Neural Networks: A Taxonomy, Review, and Future Directions. ACM Comput. Surv. (aug 2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3563691
  114. Team Bertha von Suttner at SemEval-2019 Task 4: Hyperpartisan News Detection using ELMo Sentence Representation Convolutional Network. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation. Association for Computational Linguistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, 840–844. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/S19-2146
  115. Comparing Topic-Aware Neural Networks for Bias Detection of News. In ECAI 2020 - 24th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 29 August-8 September 2020, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, August 29 - September 8, 2020 - Including 10th Conference on Prestigious Applications of Artificial Intelligence (PAIS 2020) (Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vol. 325), Giuseppe De Giacomo, Alejandro Catalá, Bistra Dilkina, Michela Milano, Senén Barro, Alberto Bugarín, and Jérôme Lang (Eds.). IOS Press, 2054–2061. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA200327
  116. Valgerður Jóhannsdóttir and Þorgerður Einarsdóttir. 2015. Gender Bias in the Media: The Case of Iceland. Stjórnmál og Stjórnsýsla 11, 2 (Autumn 2015), 207–230. https://doi.org/10.13177/irpa.a.2015.11.2.5
  117. Lalitha Kameswari and Radhika Mamidi. 2021. Towards Quantifying Magnitude of Political Bias in News Articles Using a Novel Annotation Schema. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2021), Held Online, 1-3September, 2021, Galia Angelova, Maria Kunilovskaya, Ruslan Mitkov, and Ivelina Nikolova-Koleva (Eds.). INCOMA Ltd., 671–678. https://aclanthology.org/2021.ranlp-1.76
  118. Enhancing Bias Detection in Political News Using Pragmatic Presupposition. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Natural Language Processing for Social Media (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.socialnlp-1.1
  119. Lauri Karttunen. 1971. Implicative Verbs. Language 47, 2 (1971), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.2307/412084
  120. George Karypis and Vipin Kumar. 1995. METIS – Unstructured Graph Partitioning and Sparse Matrix Ordering System, Version 2.0. Technical report. University of Minnesota, Department of Computer Science, Minneapolis, MN 55455 (01 1995).
  121. Caroline Kelly. 1989. Political identity and perceived intragroup homogeneity. British Journal of Social Psychology 28, 3 (1989), 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1989.tb00866.x
  122. SemEval-2019 Task 4: Hyperpartisan News Detection. In Proceedings of the 13th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation. Association for Computational Linguistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, 829–839. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/S19-2145
  123. Kenneth Kim. 2019. The Hostile Media Phenomenon: Testing the Effect of News Framing on Perceptions of Media Bias. Communication Research Reports 36, 1 (2019), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2018.1555659
  124. Barbara Kitchenham. 2004. Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele University. Technical Report TR/SE-0401. Department of Computer Science, Keele University, UK.
  125. Joseph T. Klapper. 1960. The effects of mass communication. (1960).
  126. Hostile Media Perceptions of Friendly Media Do Reinforce Partisanship. Communication Research 47, 2 (2020), 276–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219836059
  127. Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick and Jingbo Meng. 2009. Looking the Other Way: Selective Exposure to Attitude-Consistent and Counterattitudinal Political Information. Communication Research 36, 3 (2009), 426–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333030
  128. A domain-adaptive pre-training approach for language bias detection in news. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (Cologne Germany). ACM, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3529372.3530932
  129. An Experimental Analysis of Data Annotation Methodologies for Emotion Detection in Short Text Posted on Social Media. 8, 1 (2021), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8010019
  130. Guilty by Association: Using Word Embeddings to Measure Ethnic Stereotypes in News Coverage. 98, 2 (2021), 451–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020932304
  131. ComMA@ICON: Multilingual Gender Biased and Communal Language Identification Task at ICON-2021. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Natural Language Processing: Shared Task on Multilingual Gender Biased and Communal Language Identification. NLP Association of India (NLPAI), NIT Silchar, 1–12. https://aclanthology.org/2021.icon-multigen.1
  132. A Systematic Media Frame Analysis of 1.5 Million New York Times Articles from 2000 to 2017. In 12th ACM Conference on Web Science. ACM, Southampton United Kingdom, 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1145/3394231.3397921
  133. FrameAxis: characterizing microframe bias and intensity with word embedding. PeerJ Computer Science 7 (2021), e644. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.644
  134. Discovering Biased News Articles Leveraging Multiple Human Annotations. In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. European Language Resources Association, Marseille, France, 1268–1277. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.159
  135. Susan Leavy. 2018. Uncovering gender bias in newspaper coverage of Irish politicians using machine learning. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 34, 1 (06 2018), 48–63. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqy005
  136. Susan Leavy. 2020. Uncovering Gender Bias in Media Coverage of Politicians with Machine Learning. arXiv:2005.07734 [cs] http://arxiv.org/abs/2005.07734
  137. Eun-Ju Lee. 2012. That’s Not the Way It Is: How User-Generated Comments on the News Affect Perceived Media Bias. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 18, 1 (2012), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01597.x
  138. Mitigating Media Bias through Neutral Article Generation. CoRR abs/2104.00336 (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2104.00336
  139. NeuS: Neutral Multi-News Summarization for Mitigating Framing Bias. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.04902
  140. Tien-Tsung Lee. 2005. The Liberal Media Myth Revisited: An Examination of Factors Influencing Perceptions of Media Bias. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 49, 1 (2005), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4901_4
  141. The ”majority illusion” in social networks. PLoS ONE 11, 2 (2016), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147617
  142. Beth Levin. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation. University of Chicago Press, London; Chicago.
  143. Chang Li and Dan Goldwasser. 2019. Encoding Social Information with Graph Convolutional Networks forPolitical Perspective Detection in News Media. In Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, Florence, Italy, 2594–2604. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P19-1247
  144. Chang Li and Dan Goldwasser. 2021. Using Social and Linguistic Information to Adapt Pretrained Representations for Political Perspective Identification. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL-IJCNLP 2021 (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 4569–4579. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-acl.401
  145. Understanding Characteristics of Biased Sentences in News Articles. CIKM Workshops (2018).
  146. A Survey of Transformers. CoRR abs/2106.04554 (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.04554
  147. A Transformer-based Framework for Neutralizing and Reversing the Political Polarity of News Articles. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, 65 (2021), 1–26. Issue CSCW1. https://doi.org/10.1145/3449139
  148. Mitigating Political Bias in Language Models Through Reinforced Calibration. ArXiv abs/2104.14795 (2021).
  149. Political Depolarization of News Articles Using Attribute-aware Word Embeddings. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2101.01391
  150. POLITICS: Pretraining with Same-story Article Comparison for Ideology Prediction and Stance Detection. (2022). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2205.00619
  151. Language use in intergroup contexts: The linguistic intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67, 6 (1989), 981–993. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.981
  152. Karthic Madanagopal and James Caverlee. 2021. Towards Ongoing Detection of Linguistic Bias on Wikipedia. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021 (Ljubljana Slovenia). ACM, 629–631. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442442.3452353
  153. Black is to Criminal as Caucasian is to Police: Detecting and Removing Multiclass Bias in Word Embeddings. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 615–621. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1062
  154. Gary Marks and Norman Miller. 1987. Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin 102, 1 (1987), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.102.1.72
  155. Annotating omission in statement pairs. In Proceedings of the 11th Linguistic Annotation Workshop. Association for Computational Linguistics, Valencia, Spain, 41–45. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W17-0805
  156. HateXplain: A Benchmark Dataset for Explainable Hate Speech Detection. (2020). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2012.10289 Publisher: arXiv Version Number: 2.
  157. The “Spiral of Silence” Revisited: A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Perceptions of Opinion Support and Political Opinion Expression. Communication Research 45, 1 (2018), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217745429
  158. In the Eye of the Beholder: A Case for the Visual Hostile Media Phenomenon. Communication Research (2021), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211018596
  159. UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection. Journal of Open Source Software 3, 29 (2018), 861. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00861
  160. A Framework for the Computational Linguistic Analysis of Dehumanization. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 3 (aug 2020), 55. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2020.00055
  161. Seong-Jae Min and John C. Feaster. 2010. Missing Children in National News Coverage: Racial and Gender Representations of Missing Children Cases. Communication Research Reports 27, 3 (2010), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824091003776289
  162. Moral Framing and Ideological Bias of News. Vol. 12467. 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60975-7_16
  163. Hate speech detection and racial bias mitigation in social media based on BERT model. PLOS ONE 15, 8 (08 2020), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237861
  164. Sendhil Mullainathan and Andrei Shleifer. 2002. Media Bias. Working Paper 9295. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9295
  165. Encouraging Reading of Diverse Political Viewpoints with a Browser Widget. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 7, 1 (Aug. 2021), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14429
  166. StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers) (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 5356–5371. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.416
  167. A Survey on Predicting the Factuality and the Bias of News Media. ArXiv abs/2103.12506 (2021).
  168. Survey of Post-OCR Processing Approaches. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 6 (jul 2021), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/3453476
  169. Raymond S. Nickerson. 1998. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology 2, 2 (1998), 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
  170. Quantifying biases in online information exposure. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70, 3 (2019), 218–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24121
  171. Timothy Niven and Hung-Yu Kao. 2020. Measuring Alignment to Authoritarian State Media as Framing Bias. In Proceedings of the 3rd NLP4IF Workshop on NLP for Internet Freedom: Censorship, Disinformation, and Propaganda (Barcelona, Spain (Online)). International Committee on Computational Linguistics (ICCL), 11–21. https://aclanthology.org/2020.nlp4if-1.2
  172. Pop: Bursting News Filter Bubbles on Twitter Through Diverse Exposure. In Conference Companion Publication of the 2019 on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Austin, TX, USA) (CSCW ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 18–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311957.3359513
  173. Out of the Echo Chamber: Detecting Countering Debate Speeches. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 7073–7086. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.633
  174. Towards Detection of Subjective Bias using Contextualized Word Embeddings. In Companion Proceedings of the Web Conference 2020 (Taipei Taiwan). ACM, 75–76. https://doi.org/10.1145/3366424.3382704
  175. Bias in word embeddings. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Barcelona Spain). ACM, 446–457. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372843
  176. Eli Pariser. 2011. The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin, UK.
  177. Eun Hee Park and Veda C. Storey. 2022. Emotion Ontology Studies: A Framework for Expressing Feelings Digitally and Its Application to Sentiment Analysis. ACM Comput. Surv. (aug 2022). https://doi.org/10.1145/3555719
  178. Yilang Peng. 2018. Same Candidates, Different Faces: Uncovering Media Bias in Visual Portrayals of Presidential Candidates with Computer Vision. Journal of Communication 68, 5 (10 2018), 920–941. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy041
  179. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
  180. Gordon Pennycook and David G. Rand. 2021. The Psychology of Fake News. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 25, 5 (2021), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007
  181. Richard M. Perloff. 2015. A Three-Decade Retrospective on the Hostile Media Effect. Mass Communication and Society 18, 6 (2015), 701–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1051234
  182. Christopher Piñón. 2001. A Finer Look at the Causative-Inchoative Alternation. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 11 (2001), 346–364. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v11i0.2858
  183. Women in business media: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Representations of Women in Forbes, Fortune and Bloomberg BusinessWeek, 2015-2017. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 11, 2 (2019).
  184. Automatically Neutralizing Subjective Bias in Text. (2019). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1911.09709
  185. Riccardo Puglisi and James M. Snyder. 2015. Chapter 15 - Empirical Studies of Media Bias. In Handbook of Media Economics, Simon P. Anderson, Joel Waldfogel, and David Strömberg (Eds.). Handbook of Media Economics, Vol. 1. North-Holland, 647–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63685-0.00015-2 ISSN: 2213-6630.
  186. Prashanth Rao and Maite Taboada. 2021. Gender bias in the news: A scalable topic modelling and visualization framework. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 4 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.664737
  187. Connotation Frames: A Data-Driven Investigation. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin, Germany, 311–321. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-1030
  188. Letter to the Editors of Psychological Science: Meta-Analysis Reveals that Accuracy Nudges Have Little to No Effect for U.S. Conservatives: Regarding Pennycook et al. (2020). Psychological Science (01 2022). https://doi.org/10.25384/SAGE.12594110.v2
  189. Dbias: Detecting Biases and Ensuring Fairness in News Articles. International Journal of Data Science and Analytics (Sept. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41060-022-00359-4
  190. Linguistic Models for Analyzing and Detecting Biased Language. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). Association for Computational Linguistics, Sofia, Bulgaria, 1650–1659. https://aclanthology.org/P13-1162
  191. Scott A. Reid. 2012. A Self-Categorization Explanation for the Hostile Media Effect. Journal of Communication 62, 3 (2012), 381–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01647.x
  192. Ellen Riloff and Janyce Wiebe. 2003. Learning Extraction Patterns for Subjective Expressions. In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 105–112. https://aclanthology.org/W03-1014
  193. Automatic Detection of Hate Speech on Facebook Using Sentiment and Emotion Analysis. In 2019 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Information and Communication (ICAIIC). 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAIIC.2019.8669073
  194. Technique-based inoculation against real-world misinformation. Royal Society Open Science 9, 5 (2022), 211719. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211719
  195. The “false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13, 3 (may 1977), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X
  196. Pseudo-labelling Enhanced Media Bias Detection. (2021). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2107.07705
  197. Bias Bubbles: Using Semi-Supervised Learning to Measure How Many Biased News Articles Are Around Us. In The 29th Irish Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science 2021, Dublin, Republic of Ireland, December 9-10, 2021 (CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 3105), Arjun Pakrashi, Ellen Rushe, Mehran Hossein Zadeh Bazargani, and Brian Mac Namee (Eds.). CEUR-WS.org, 153–164. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3105/paper40.pdf
  198. Mark Rubin and Constantina Badea. 2007. Why Do People Perceive Ingroup Homogeneity on Ingroup Traits and Outgroup Homogeneity on Outgroup Traits? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33, 1 (2007), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206293190 PMID: 17178928.
  199. Social Media News Communities: Gatekeeping, Coverage, and Statement Bias. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (CIKM ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1679–1684. https://doi.org/10.1145/2505515.2505623
  200. Social Media News Communities: Gatekeeping, Coverage, and Statement Bias. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (San Francisco, California, USA) (CIKM ’13). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1679–1684. https://doi.org/10.1145/2505515.2505623
  201. Active inoculation boosts attitudinal resistance against extremist persuasion techniques: a novel approach towards the prevention of violent extremism. Behavioural Public Policy (2021), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.60
  202. Assessing Media Bias in Cross-Linguistic and Cross-National Populations. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, ICWSM 2021, held virtually, June 7-10, 2021, Ceren Budak, Meeyoung Cha, Daniele Quercia, and Lexing Xie (Eds.). AAAI Press, 561–572. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18084
  203. Eitan Sapiro-Gheiler. 2019. Examining Political Trustworthiness through Text-Based Measures of Ideology. 33 (2019), 10029–10030. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v33i01.330110029
  204. Why Partisans See Mass Media as Biased. Communication Research 31, 6 (2004), 623–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204269390
  205. We Are the People and You Are Fake News: A Social Identity Approach to Populist Citizens’ False Consensus and Hostile Media Perceptions. Communication Research 47, 2 (2020), 201–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218794854
  206. Gün R. Semin and Klaus Fiedler. 1988. The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 4 (1988), 558–568. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.558
  207. Detecting and understanding moral biases in news. In Proceedings of the First Joint Workshop on Narrative Understanding, Storylines, and Events (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 120–125. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.nuse-1.15
  208. Jay Kachhadia Ania Korsunska Shloak Gupta, Sarah Bolden and Jennifer Stromer-Galley. 2020. PoliBERT: Classifying political social media messages with BERT. 2020 International Conference on Social Computing, Behavioral-Cultural Modeling, & Prediction and Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation Working Papers 13 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61255-9
  209. Manjira Sinha and Tirthankar Dasgupta. 2021. Determining Subjective Bias in Text through Linguistically Informed Transformer based Multi-Task Network. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management (Virtual Event Queensland Australia). ACM, 3418–3422. https://doi.org/10.1145/3459637.3482084
  210. Political Ideology and Polarization of Policy Positions: A Multi-dimensional Approach. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2106.14387
  211. Reflecting on Six Decades of Selective Exposure Research: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities. Social and Personality Psychology Compass 2, 1 (2008), 464–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00060.x
  212. Timo Spinde. 2021. An Interdisciplinary Approach for the Automated Detection and Visualization of Media Bias in News Articles. In 2021 International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW). 1096–1103. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDMW53433.2021.00144
  213. Enabling News Consumers to View and Understand Biased News Coverage: A Study on the Perception and Visualization of Media Bias. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020 (2020-01-01) (JCDL ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Virtual Event, China, 389–392. https://doi.org/10.1145/3383583.3398619
  214. An Integrated Approach to Detect Media Bias in German News Articles. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries in 2020 (2020-01-01) (JCDL ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Virtual Event, China, 505–506. https://doi.org/10.1145/3383583.3398585
  215. Media Bias in German News Articles : A Combined Approach. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on News Recommendation and Analytics ( INRA 2020). Virtual event. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65965-3_41
  216. How do we raise media bias awareness effectively? Effects of visualizations to communicate bias. PLOS ONE 17, 4 (2022), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266204
  217. Do You Think It’s Biased? How To Ask For The Perception Of Media Bias. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL) (2021-09-01). https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00018
  218. Exploiting Transformer-Based Multitask Learning for the Detection of Media Bias in News Articles. In Information for a Better World: Shaping the Global Future. iConference 2022., Malte Smits (Ed.). Vol. 13192. Springer International Publishing, 225–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96957-8_20 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
  219. Neural Media Bias Detection Using Distant Supervision With BABE - Bias Annotations By Experts. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021. Dominican Republic. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.101
  220. Identification of Biased Terms in News Articles by Comparison of Outlet-specific Word Embeddings. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference (iConference 2021) (Beijing, China (Virtual Event), 2021-03-01). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71305-8_17
  221. MBIC – A Media Bias Annotation Dataset Including Annotator Characteristics. In Proceedings of the iConference 2021. Beijing, China (Virtual Event). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17192924
  222. Automated identification of bias inducing words in news articles using linguistic and context-oriented features. Information Processing & Management 58, 3 (2021), 102505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102505
  223. Predicting the Topical Stance and Political Leaning of Media using Tweets. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 527–537. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.50
  224. Cass R. Sunstein. 2009. Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide. Oxford University Press.
  225. Searching for the Backfire Effect: Measurement and Design Considerations. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 9, 3 (2020), 286–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.006
  226. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. Organizational identity: A reader 56, 65 (1979), 9780203505984–16.
  227. Edson C. Tandoc Jr. 2019. The facts of fake news: A research review. Sociology Compass 13, 9 (2019), e12724. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12724
  228. Minh Tran. 2020. How biased are American media outlets? A framework for presentation bias regression. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data) (Atlanta, GA, USA). IEEE, 4359–4364. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData50022.2020.9377987
  229. News media literacy, perceptions of bias, and interpretation of news. Journalism 21, 2 (2020), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918805262
  230. John C. Turner. 1991. Social influence. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
  231. The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49, 3 (1985), 557–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577
  232. Esther van den Berg and Katja Markert. 2020. Context in Informational Bias Detection. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Barcelona, Spain (Online)). International Committee on Computational Linguistics, 6315–6326. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.556
  233. Sander van der Linden. 2022. Misinformation: susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public. Nature Medicine 28, 3 (2022), 460–467. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6
  234. Teun A. van Dijk. 2007. Chapter 12 Discourse and Racism.
  235. Attention Is All You Need. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1706.03762
  236. Investigating Gender Bias in Language Models Using Causal Mediation Analysis. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, H. Larochelle, M. Ranzato, R. Hadsell, M. F. Balcan, and H. Lin (Eds.), Vol. 33. Curran Associates, Inc., 12388–12401. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2020/file/92650b2e92217715fe312e6fa7b90d82-Paper.pdf
  237. Echo chamber detection and analysis: A topology- and content-based approach in the COVID-19 scenario. 11, 1 (2021), 78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-021-00779-3
  238. Jun Wang and Bei Yu. 2021. News2PubMed: A Browser Extension for Linking Health News to Medical Literature. In Proceedings of the 44th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (Virtual Event, Canada) (SIGIR ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2605–2609. https://doi.org/10.1145/3404835.3462788
  239. Are “Undocumented Workers” the Same as “Illegal Aliens”? Disentangling Denotation and Connotation in Vector Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 4090–4105. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.335
  240. Incidental Exposure, Selective Exposure, and Political Information Sharing: Integrating Online Exposure Patterns and Expression on Social Media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 22, 6 (11 2017), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12199
  241. Melvin Wevers. 2019. Using Word Embeddings to Examine Gender Bias in Dutch Newspapers, 1950-1990. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Approaches to Historical Language Change (Florence, Italy). Association for Computational Linguistics, 92–97. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-4712
  242. David Manning White. 1950. The “Gate Keeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. Journalism Quarterly 27, 4 (1950), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905002700403
  243. Alden Williams. 1975. Unbiased Study of Television News Bias.
  244. Recognizing Contextual Polarity in Phrase-Level Sentiment Analysis. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) (HLT ’05). Association for Computational Linguistics, USA, 347–354. https://doi.org/10.3115/1220575.1220619
  245. Stephane Wolton. 2017. Are Biased Media Bad for Democracy? Asymmetric & Private Information eJournal, Microeconomics.
  246. TIMME: Twitter Ideology-detection via Multi-task Multi-relational Embedding. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining (Virtual Event CA USA). ACM, 2258–2268. https://doi.org/10.1145/3394486.3403275
  247. Towards Better Text Understanding and Retrieval through Kernel Entity Salience Modeling. In The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research &; Development in Information Retrieval (Ann Arbor, MI, USA) (SIGIR ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 575–584. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209978.3209982
  248. Modeling, Quantifying and Visualizing Media Bias on Twitter. 8 (2020), 81812–81821. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990800
  249. Xueying Zhang and Mei-Chen Lin. 2021. The Effects of Social Identities and Issue Involvement on Perceptions of Media Bias Against Gun Owners and Intention to Participate in Discursive Activities: In the Context of the Media Coverage of Mass Shootings. Mass Communication and Society 0, 0 (2021), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2021.1916036
  250. A Survey of Information Cascade Analysis: Models, Predictions, and Recent Advances. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 2, Article 27 (mar 2021), 36 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3433000
  251. Hidden Biases in Unreliable News Detection Datasets. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume (Online). Association for Computational Linguistics, 2482–2492. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.211
  252. Uncovering Media Bias via Social Network Learning. 12, 1 (2021), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3422181
  253. Should we worry about filter bubbles? Internet Policy Review 5, 1 (2016), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401
Citations (10)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.