Paper detail

Close to Human-Level Agreement: Tracing Journeys of Violent Speech in Incel Posts with GPT-4-Enhanced Annotations

This study investigates the prevalence of violent language on incels.is. It evaluates GPT models (GPT-3.5 and GPT-4) for content analysis in social sciences, focusing on the impact of varying prompts and batch sizes on coding quality for the detection of violent speech. We scraped over 6.9M posts from incels.is and categorized a random sample into non-violent, explicitly violent, and implicitly violent content. Two human coders annotated 3,028 posts, which we used to tune and evaluate GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 models across different prompts and batch sizes regarding coding reliability. The best-performing GPT-4 model annotated an additional 30,000 posts for further analysis. Our findings indicate an overall increase in violent speech overtime on incels.is, both at the community and individual level, particularly among more engaged users. While directed violent language decreases, non-directed violent language increases, and self-harm content shows a decline, especially after 2.5 years of user activity. We find substantial agreement between both human coders (K = .65), while the best GPT-4 model yields good agreement with both human coders (K = 0.54 for Human A and K = 0.62 for Human B). Weighted and macro F1 scores further support this alignment. Overall, this research provides practical means for accurately identifying violent language at a large scale that can aid content moderation and facilitate next-step research into the causal mechanism and potential mitigations of violent expression and radicalization in communities like incels.is.

preprint2024arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.