Cover Image

Will Annotators Disagree? Identifying Subjectivity in Value-Laden Arguments

Fuente: arXiv

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Homayounirad, Amir, Liscio, Enrico, Wang, Tong, Jonker, Catholijn M., Siebert, Luciano C.
Format:	Preprint
Published:	2025
Subjects:	Computation and Language
Online Access:	Acceder al recurso
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Similar Items

Taking a SEAT: Predicting Value Interpretations from Sentiment, Emotion, Argument, and Topic Annotations
by: Dobrinoiu, Adina Nicola, et al.
Published: (2025)

Value Preferences Estimation and Disambiguation in Hybrid Participatory Systems
by: Liscio, Enrico, et al.
Published: (2024)

A Hybrid Intelligence Method for Argument Mining
by: van der Meer, Michiel, et al.
Published: (2024)

Annotator-Centric Active Learning for Subjective NLP Tasks
by: van der Meer, Michiel, et al.
Published: (2024)

An Empirical Analysis of Diversity in Argument Summarization
by: van der Meer, Michiel, et al.
Published: (2024)

Do Differences in Values Influence Disagreements in Online Discussions?
by: van der Meer, Michiel, et al.
Published: (2023)

Not All Subjectivity Is the Same! Defining Desiderata for the Evaluation of Subjectivity in NLP
by: Khurana, Urja, et al.
Published: (2026)

Reflecti-Mate: A Conversational Agent for Adaptive Decision-Making Support Through System 1 and System 2 Thinking
by: Tarvirdians, Morita, et al.
Published: (2026)

Accurate and Data-Efficient Toxicity Prediction when Annotators Disagree
by: Jaggi, Harbani, et al.
Published: (2024)

Diverging Preferences: When do Annotators Disagree and do Models Know?
by: Zhang, Michael JQ, et al.
Published: (2024)

News is More than a Collection of Facts: Moral Frame Preserving News Summarization
by: Liscio, Enrico, et al.
Published: (2025)

Subjectivity in the Annotation of Bridging Anaphora
by: Levine, Lauren, et al.
Published: (2025)

Morality is Non-Binary: Building a Pluralist Moral Sentence Embedding Space using Contrastive Learning
by: Park, Jeongwoo, et al.
Published: (2024)

The Emotion-Memory Link: Do Memorability Annotations Matter for Intelligent Systems?
by: Tsfasman, Maria, et al.
Published: (2025)

LLMs Homogenize Values in Constructive Arguments on Value-Laden Topics
by: Shahid, Farhana, et al.
Published: (2025)

Learning Who Disagrees: Demographic Importance Weighting for Modeling Annotator Distributions with DiADEM
by: Shetty, Samay U., et al.
Published: (2026)

When Annotators Agree but Labels Disagree: The Projection Problem in Stance Detection
by: Zhang, Bowen
Published: (2026)

Introducing MeMo: A Multimodal Dataset for Memory Modelling in Multiparty Conversations
by: Tsfasman, Maria, et al.
Published: (2024)

Reading Between the Signs: Predicting Future Suicidal Ideation from Adolescent Social Media Texts
by: Blum, Paul, et al.
Published: (2025)

When Annotators Disagree, Topology Explains: Mapper, a Topological Tool for Exploring Text Embedding Geometry and Ambiguity
by: Rair, Nisrine, et al.
Published: (2025)

Signs of Struggle: Spotting Cognitive Distortions across Language and Register
by: Kuber, Abhishek, et al.
Published: (2025)

Investigating Subjective Factors of Argument Strength: Storytelling, Emotions, and Hedging
by: Quensel, Carlotta, et al.
Published: (2025)

Humans Hallucinate Too: Language Models Identify and Correct Subjective Annotation Errors With Label-in-a-Haystack Prompts
by: Chochlakis, Georgios, et al.
Published: (2025)

Agree to Disagree? A Meta-Evaluation of LLM Misgendering
by: Subramonian, Arjun, et al.
Published: (2025)

Effective QA-driven Annotation of Predicate-Argument Relations Across Languages
by: Davidov, Jonathan, et al.
Published: (2026)

Flee the Flaw: Annotating the Underlying Logic of Fallacious Arguments Through Templates and Slot-filling
by: Robbani, Irfan, et al.
Published: (2024)

Fearful Falcons and Angry Llamas: Emotion Category Annotations of Arguments by Humans and LLMs
by: Greschner, Lynn, et al.
Published: (2024)

Who Watches the Watchmen? Humans Disagree With Translation Metrics on Unseen Domains
by: Schmidt, Finn, et al.
Published: (2026)

LLM Judges Inconsistently Disagree Across Safety Criteria and Harm Categories
by: Vishnubhotla, Krishnapriya, et al.
Published: (2026)

Disagreeing Rationales: Rethinking Classification and Explainability Evaluation in Hate Speech Detection
by: Muscato, Benedetta, et al.
Published: (2026)

Cost-Efficient Subjective Task Annotation and Modeling through Few-Shot Annotator Adaptation
by: Golazizian, Preni, et al.
Published: (2024)

MAVEN-Arg: Completing the Puzzle of All-in-One Event Understanding Dataset with Event Argument Annotation
by: Wang, Xiaozhi, et al.
Published: (2023)

Capturing Perspectives of Crowdsourced Annotators in Subjective Learning Tasks
by: Mokhberian, Negar, et al.
Published: (2023)

Are Large Language Models Reliable Argument Quality Annotators?
by: Mirzakhmedova, Nailia, et al.
Published: (2024)

Labels have Human Values: Value Calibration of Subjective Tasks
by: Parappan, Mohammed Fayiz, et al.
Published: (2026)

Detecting Fallacies in Climate Misinformation: A Technocognitive Approach to Identifying Misleading Argumentation
by: Zanartu, Francisco, et al.
Published: (2024)

Heard or Halted? Gender, Interruptions, and Emotional Tone in U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments
by: Tong, Yifei
Published: (2025)

Guidelines for the Annotation and Visualization of Legal Argumentation Structures in Chinese Judicial Decisions
by: Chen, Kun, et al.
Published: (2026)

Large Language Models as Annotators for Machine Translation Quality Estimation
by: Wang, Sidi, et al.
Published: (2026)

Multi-Perspective LLM Annotations for Valid Analyses in Subjective Tasks
by: Mehrotra, Navya, et al.
Published: (2026)