How People Talk About Armed Conflicts
Armed conflicts around the world produce displacement, injury, and death. This study examines how anonymous and pseudonymous Internet commenters discuss such conflicts. Specifically, we ask how permissible it is to express positive or negative sentiments about these conflicts as a function of variables including region, conflict nature, and severity. Data from the Armed Conflicts Database is aggregated to identify a number of potential factors that may influence views on acceptable sentiments. We used sentiment analysis to code a large-scale sample of the Reddit corpus. We judged permissibility using the Reddit voting features. This revealed that positive sentiments are found not permissible for higher numbers of fatalities, and that negative sentiments are found to be more permissible for certain regions and older conflicts, but less permissible for territorial conflicts. Thus, this study provides evidence that many features help construct public perception of a conflict.
KeywordsBehavioral and social sciences Corpus linguistics GLMM Armed conflicts Public opinion
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation under grants titled “Updating the Militarized Dispute Data Through Crowdsourcing” (SBE-SES-1528624) and “Alignment in webforum discourse” (CISE-IIS-1459300).
- 1.Armed Conflict Database: Monitoring Conflicts Worldwide (2016). https://acd.iiss.org/en
- 3.Dunn, O.J.: Estimation of the medians for dependent variables. In: The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, pp. 192–197 (1959)Google Scholar
- 14.Shirky, C.: The political power of social media. Foreign Aff. 90(1), 28–41 (2011)Google Scholar
- 15.Socher, R., Perelygin, A., Wu, J.Y., Chuang, J., Manning, C.D., Ng, A.Y., Potts, C.: Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), vol. 1631, p. 1642Google Scholar