Luis Espinosa-Anke

Understanding why people trust or distrust one another, institutions, or information is a complex task that has led scholars from various fields of study to employ diverse epistemological and methodological approaches. Despite the challenges, it is generally agreed that the antecedents of trust (and distrust) encompass a multitude of emotional and cognitive factors, including a general disposition to trust and an assessment of trustworthiness factors. In an era marked by increasing political polarization, cultural backlash, widespread disinformation and fake news, and the use of AI software to produce news content, the need to study trust in the news has gained significant traction. This study presents the findings of a trust in the news experiment designed in collaboration with Spanish and UK journalists, fact-checkers, and the CardiffNLP Natural Language Processing research group. The purpose of this experiment, conducted in June 2023, was to examine the extent to which people trust a set of fake news articles based on previously identified disinformation narratives related to gender, climate change, and COVID-19. The online experiment participants (801 in Spain and 800 in the UK) were asked to read three fake news items and rate their level of trust on a scale from 1 (not true) to 8 (true). The pieces used a combination of factors, including stance (favourable, neutral, or against the narrative), presence of toxic expressions, clickbait titles, and sources of information to test which elements influenced people's responses the most. Half of the pieces were produced by humans and the other half by ChatGPT. The results show that the topic of news articles, stance, people's age, gender, and political ideologies significantly affected their levels of trust in the news, while the authorship (humans or ChatGPT) does not have a significant impact.

Automated content moderation for collaborative knowledge hubs like Wikipedia or Wikidata is an important yet challenging task due to multiple factors. In this paper, we construct a database of discussions happening around articles marked for deletion in several Wikis and in three languages, which we then use to evaluate a range of LMs on different tasks (from predicting the outcome of the discussion to identifying the implicit policy an individual comment might be pointing to). Our results reveal, among others, that discussions leading to deletion are easier to predict, and that, surprisingly, self-produced tags (keep, delete or redirect) don't always help guiding the classifiers, presumably because of users' hesitation or deliberation within comments.

Zara Siddique, Liam Turner, Luis Espinosa-Anke. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 3: System Demonstrations). 2025.

Hsuvas Borkakoty, Luis Espinosa-Anke. Proceedings of the Tenth Workshop on Noisy and User-generated Text. 2025.

Zara Siddique, Liam Turner, Luis Espinosa-Anke. Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 2024.

Metaphor identification aims at understanding whether a given expression is used figuratively in context. However, in this paper we show how existing metaphor identification datasets can be gamed by fully ignoring the potential metaphorical expression or the context in which it occurs. We test this hypothesis in a variety of datasets and settings, and show that metaphor identification systems based on language models without complete information can be competitive with those using the full context. This is due to the construction procedures to build such datasets, which introduce unwanted biases for positive and negative classes. Finally, we test the same hypothesis on datasets that are carefully sampled from natural corpora and where this bias is not present, making these datasets more challenging and reliable.

Despite its relevance, the maturity of NLP for social media pales in comparison with general-purpose models, metrics and benchmarks. This fragmented landscape makes it hard for the community to know, for instance, given a task, which is the best performing model and how it compares with others. To alleviate this issue, we introduce a unified benchmark for NLP evaluation in social media, SuperTweetEval, which includes a heterogeneous set of tasks and datasets combined, adapted and constructed from scratch. We benchmarked the performance of a wide range of models on SuperTweetEval and our results suggest that, despite the recent advances in language modelling, social media remains challenging.