Abstract
Online social networks (OSN) play an essential role for connecting people and allowing them to communicate online. OSN users share their thoughts, moments, and news with their network. The messages they share online can include sarcastic posts, where the intended meaning expressed by the written text is different from the literal one. This could result in miscommunication. Previous research in psycholinguistics has studied the sociocultural factors the might lead to sarcasm misunderstanding between speakers and listeners. However, there is a lack of such studies in the context of OSN. In this paper we fill this gap by performing a quantitative analysis on the influence of sociocultural variables, including gender, age, country, and English language nativeness, on the effectiveness of sarcastic communication online. We collect examples of sarcastic tweets directly from the authors who posted them. Further, we ask third-party annotators of different sociocultural backgrounds to label these tweets for sarcasm. Our analysis indicates that age, English language nativeness, and country are significantly influential and should be considered in the design of future social analysis tools that either study sarcasm directly, or look at related phenomena where sarcasm may have an influence. We also make observations about the social ecology surrounding sarcastic exchanges on OSNs. We conclude by suggesting ways in which our findings can be included in future work.
- David J Amante. 1981. The theory of ironic speech acts. Poetics Today, Vol. 2, 2 (1981), 77--96.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- John Langshaw Austin. 1962. How to do things with words. Vol. 88. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
- Lawrence F. Bouton. 1988. A cross-cultural study of ability to interpret implicatures in English. World Englishes, Vol. 7, 2 (1988), 183--196.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Lawrence F Bouton. 1992. The Interpretation of Implicature in English by NNS: Does It Come Automatically--Without Being Explicitly Taught? Pragmatics and language learning, Vol. 3 (1992), 53--65.Google Scholar
- Erin E. Buckels, Paul D. Trapnell, and Delroy L. Paulhus. 2014. Trolls just want to have fun. Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 67 (2014), 97--102.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- John D Campbell and Albert N Katz. 2012. Are there necessary conditions for inducing a sense of sarcastic irony? Discourse Processes, Vol. 49, 6 (2012), 459--480.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Benjamin Paul Chamberlain, Clive Humby, and Marc Peter Deisenroth. 2017. Probabilistic inference of twitter users' age based on what they follow. In Joint European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer International Publishing, Skopje, Macedonia, 191--203.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Justin Cheng, Michael Bernstein, Cristian Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil, and Jure Leskovec. 2017. Anyone Can Become a Troll: Causes of Trolling Behavior in Online Discussions. In CSCW. Association for Computing Machinery, Portland, OR, USA, 1217----1230.Google Scholar
- Herbert H. Clark and Richard J. Gerrig. 1984 a. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 113, 1 (1984), 121--126.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Herbert H. Clark and Richard J. Gerrig. 1984 b. On the pretense theory of irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 113, 1 (1984), 121--126.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Reuben Cohn-Gordon and Leon Bergen. 2019. Verbal Irony, Pretense, and the Common Ground. (2019). https://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/004577Google Scholar
- Herbert L Colston. 2000. On necessary conditions for verbal irony comprehension. Pragmatics & Cognition, Vol. 8, 2 (2000), 277--324.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Naomi Craker and Evita March. 2016. The dark side of Facebook®: The Dark Tetrad, negative social potency, and trolling behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 102 (2016), 79--84.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Erik H Erikson. 1994. Identity and the life cycle .W.W. Norton & Company, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Nick Feltovich, Richmond Harbaugh, and Ted To. 2002. Too cool for school? Signalling and countersignalling. RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 33, 4 (2002), 630--649.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ellen P Francik and Herbert H Clark. 1985. How to make requests that overcome obstacles to compliance. Journal of Memory and Language, Vol. 24, 5 (1985), 560--568.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Pral Fugelli, Leif C. Lahn, and Anders I. Mørch. 2013. Shared Prolepsis and Intersubjectivity in Open Source Development: Expansive Grounding in Distributed Work. In CSCW. Association for Computing Machinery, San Antonio, TX, USA, 129----144.Google Scholar
- Ge Gao, Sun Young Hwang, Gabriel Culbertson, Susan R. Fussell, and Malte F. Jung. 2017. Beyond Information Content: The Effects of Culture on Affective Grounding in Instant Messaging Conversations. PACMHCI 1 (CSCW), Vol. 1 (2017), 18.Google Scholar
- Raymond W. Gibbs. 2000. Irony in Talk Among Friends. Metaphor and Symbol, Vol. 15, 1--2 (2000), 5--27.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- H. P. Grice. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In Syntax and Semantics: Vol. 3: Speech Acts, Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan (Eds.). Academic Press, Cambridge, UK, 41--58.Google Scholar
- M Harris, S Ivanko, S Jungen, S Hala, and P Pexman. 2001. You're really nice: Children's understanding of sarcasm and personality traits. (2001). Poster presented at the second biennial meeting of the Cognitive Development Society, Virginia Beach, VA, USA.Google Scholar
- Gail D. Heyman and Susan A. Gelman. 1999. The Use of Trait Labels in Making Psychological Inferences. Child Development, Vol. 70, 3 (1999), 604--619.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Stacey L Ivanko, Penny M Pexman, and Kara M Olineck. 2004. How Sarcastic Are You?: Individual Differences and Verbal Irony. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 23, 3 (2004), 244--271.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Julia Jorgensen. 1996 a. The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 26, 5 (1996), 613 -- 634.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Julia Jorgensen. 1996 b. The functions of sarcastic irony in speech. Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 26, 5 (1996), 613 -- 634.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Aditya Joshi, Pushpak Bhattacharyya, Mark Carman, Jaya Saraswati, and Rajita Shukla. 2016a. How Do Cultural Differences Impact the Quality of Sarcasm Annotation?: A Case Study of Indian Annotators and American Text. In SIGHUM. ACL, Berlin, Germany, 95--99.Google Scholar
- Aditya Joshi, Pushpak Bhattacharyya, and Mark J. Carman. 2017. Automatic Sarcasm Detection: A Survey. Comput. Surveys, Vol. 50, 5 (2017), 22.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Aditya Joshi, Vaibhav Tripathi, Kevin Patel, Pushpak Bhattacharyya, and Mark Carman. 2016b. Are Word Embedding-based Features Useful for Sarcasm Detection?. In EMNLP. ACL, Austin, Texas, USA, 1006--1011.Google Scholar
- A Katz, I Piasecka, and M Toplak. 2001. Comprehending the sarcastic comments of males and females. (2001). Poster presented at the 42nd annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society.Google Scholar
- Albert N. Katz and Penny M. Pexman. 1997. Interpreting Figurative Statements: Speaker Occupation Can Change Metaphor to Irony. Metaphor and Symbol, Vol. 12, 1 (1997), 19--41.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Roger J. Kreuz and Sam Glucksberg. 1989. How to Be Sarcastic: The Echoic Reminder Theory of Verbal Irony. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 118, 4 (1989), 374--386.Google Scholar
- Quoc Le and Tomas Mikolov. 2014. Distributed representations of sentences and documents. In ICML. JMLR, Beijing, China, 1188--1196.Google Scholar
- Pengfei Li, Hua Lu, Nattiya Kanhabua, Sha Zhao, and Gang Pan. 2018. Location inference for non-geotagged tweets in user timelines. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, Vol. 31, 6 (2018), 1150--1165.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Jakub Mácha. 2012. Searle on Metaphor. Organon F, Vol. 19 (2012), 186--197.Google Scholar
- Diana Maynard and Mark Greenwood. 2014. Who cares about Sarcastic Tweets? Investigating the Impact of Sarcasm on Sentiment Analysis.. In LREC. ELRA, Reykjavik, Iceland, 4238--4243.Google Scholar
- Walaa Medhat, Ahmed Hassan, and Hoda Korashy. 2014. Sentiment analysis algorithms and applications: A survey. Ain Shams engineering journal, Vol. 5, 4 (2014), 1093--1113.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Lesley Milroy. 2000. Britain and the United States: Two Nations Divided by the Same Language (and Different Language Ideologies). Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, Vol. 10, 1 (2000), 56--89.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Eric W Noreen. 1989. Computer-intensive methods for testing hypotheses .Wiley, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Silviu Oprea and Walid Magdy. 2019. Exploring Author Context for Detecting Intended vs Perceived Sarcasm. In ACL. ACL, Florence, Italy, 2854--2859.Google Scholar
- Silviu Oprea and Walid Magdy. 2020. iSarcasm: A Dataset of Intended Sarcasm. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Penny M Pexman. 2005. Social Factors in the Interpretation of Verbal Irony: The Roles of Speaker and Listener Characteristics., 209--232 pages.Google Scholar
- Penny M. Pexman, Todd R. Ferretti, and Albert N. Katz. 2000. Discourse Factors That Influence Online Reading of Metaphor and Irony. Discourse Processes, Vol. 29, 3 (2000), 201--222.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Penny M. Pexman and Kara M. Olineck. 2002. Understanding Irony: How Do Stereotypes Cue Speaker Intent? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 21, 3 (2002), 245--274.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Penny M Pexman and Meghan T Zvaigzne. 2004. Does Irony Go Better With Friends? Metaphor and Symbol, Vol. 19, 2 (2004), 143--163.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ellen Riloff, Ashequl Qadir, Prafulla Surve, Lalindra De Silva, Nathan Gilbert, and Ruihong Huang. 2013. Sarcasm as Contrast between a Positive Sentiment and Negative Situation. In EMNLP. ACL, Seattle, Washington, USA, 704--714.Google Scholar
- Patricia Rockwell and Evelyn M. Theriot. 2001. Culture, gender, and gender mix in encoders of sarcasm: A self-assessment analysis. Communication Research Reports, Vol. 18, 1 (2001), 44--52.Google Scholar
- Mohsen Sayyadiharikandeh, Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, and Alessandro Flammini. 2016. Cross-domain Gender Detection in Twitter. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Approaches to Social Modeling. SocInfo, Bellevue, WA, USA.Google Scholar
- Michael F. Schober and Herbert H. Clark. 1989. Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 21 (1989), 211--232.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- John R Searle. 1975. Indirect speech acts. In Speech acts. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands, 59--82.Google Scholar
- John R Searle and John Rogers Searle. 1969. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Vol. 626. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Marina Sokolova and Guy Lapalme. 2009. A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Information Processing & Management, Vol. 45, 4 (2009), 427--437.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson. 1981. Irony and the use-mention distinction. Philosophy, Vol. 3 (1981), 143--184.Google Scholar
- Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition .Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Yi Tay, Anh Tuan Luu, Siu Cheung Hui, and Jian Su. 2018. Reasoning with Sarcasm by Reading In-Between. In ACL. ACL, Melbourne, Australia, 1010--1020.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Charlotte Taylor. 2016. Women are bitchy but men are sarcastic? Investigating gender and sarcasm. Gender and Language, Vol. 11, 3 (2016), 30.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Akira Utsumi. 2000. Verbal irony as implicit display of ironic environment: Distinguishing ironic utterances from nonirony. Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 32, 12 (2000), 1777--1806.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Deirdre Wilson. 2006. The pragmatics of verbal irony: Echo or pretence? Lingua, Vol. 116, 10 (2006), 1722--1743.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Alexander Yeh. 2000. More Accurate Tests for the Statistical Significance of Result Differences. In COLING. ACL, Saarbrücken, Germany, 947--953.Google Scholar
Digital Library
Index Terms
The Effect of Sociocultural Variables on Sarcasm Communication Online
Recommendations
Signaling sarcasm
The use of hashtags such as #sarcasm reduces the further use of linguistic markers of sarcasm in tweets.Hashtags such as #sarcasm appear to be the extralinguistic equivalent of non-verbal expressions in live interaction.Sarcastic hashtags are 90% ...
Multimodal communication on tumblr: "i have so many feels!"
WebSci '14: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on Web scienceWe manually analyzed a corpus of Tumblr posts for sentiment, looking at images, text, and their combination. A dataset was constructed of posts with both text and images, as well as a dataset of posts containing only text, along with a codebook for ...
Sentence-Level Sarcasm Detection in English and Filipino Tweets
ICIBE' 18: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Industrial and Business EngineeringSarcasm is a special form of sentiment which defines as "a nuanced form of language in which individuals say the opposite of what is implied". In this study, the researchers collected 6,000 Tagalog tweets and 6,000 English tweets from the microblogging ...






Comments