Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userHow to Write a Bias Statement: Recommendations for Submissions to the Workshop on Gender Bias in NLP
83
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Christian Hardmeier
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
At the Workshop on Gender Bias in NLP (GeBNLP), wed like to encourage authors to give explicit consideration to the wider aspects of bias and its social implications. For the 2020 edition of the workshop, we therefore requested that all authors include an explicit bias statement in their work to clarify how their work relates to the social context in which NLP systems are used. The programme committee of the workshops included a number of reviewers with a background in the humanities and social sciences, in addition to NLP experts doing the bulk of the reviewing. Each paper was assigned one of those reviewers, and they were asked to pay specific attention to the provided bias statements in their reviews. This initiative was well received by the authors who submitted papers to the workshop, several of whom said they received useful suggestions and literature hints from the bias reviewers. We are therefore planning to keep this feature of the review process in future editions of the workshop.
rate research
Read More
Cultural products are a source to acquire individual values and behaviours. Therefore, the differences in the content of the magazines aimed specifically at women or men are a means to create and reproduce gender stereotypes. In this study, we compare the content of a women-oriented magazine with that of a men-oriented one, both produced by the same editorial group, over a decade (2008-2018). With Topic Modelling techniques we identify the main themes discussed in the magazines and quantify how much the presence of these topics differs between magazines over time. Then, we performed a word-frequency analysis to validate this methodology and extend the analysis to other subjects that did not emerge automatically. Our results show that the frequency of appearance of the topics Family, Business and Women as sex objects, present an initial bias that tends to disappear over time. Conversely, in Fashion and Science topics, the initial differences between both magazines are maintained. Besides, we show that in 2012, the content associated with horoscope increased in the women-oriented magazine, generating a new gap that remained open over time. Also, we show a strong increase in the use of words associated with feminism since 2015 and specifically the word abortion in 2018. Overall, these computational tools allowed us to analyse more than 24,000 articles. Up to our knowledge, this is the first study to compare magazines in such a large dataset, a task that would have been prohibitive using manual content analysis methodologies.
Recent studies have shown that word embeddings exhibit gender bias inherited from the training corpora. However, most studies to date have focused on quantifying and mitigating such bias only in English. These analyses cannot be directly extended to languages that exhibit morphological agreement on gender, such as Spanish and French. In this paper, we propose new metrics for evaluating gender bias in word embeddings of these languages and further demonstrate evidence of gender bias in bilingual embeddings which align these languages with English. Finally, we extend an existing approach to mitigate gender bias in word embeddings under both monolingual and bilingual settings. Experiments on modified Word Embedding Association Test, word similarity, word translation, and word pair translation tasks show that the proposed approaches effectively reduce the gender bias while preserving the utility of the embeddings.
In this paper, we quantify, analyze and mitigate gender bias exhibited in ELMos contextualized word vectors. First, we conduct several intrinsic analyses and find that (1) training data for ELMo contains significantly more male than female entities, (2) the trained ELMo embeddings systematically encode gender information and (3) ELMo unequally encodes gender information about male and female entities. Then, we show that a state-of-the-art coreference system that depends on ELMo inherits its bias and demonstrates significant bias on the WinoBias probing corpus. Finally, we explore two methods to mitigate such gender bias and show that the bias demonstrated on WinoBias can be eliminated.
Despite their prevalence in society, social biases are difficult to identify, primarily because human judgements in this domain can be unreliable. We take an unsupervised approach to identifying gender bias against women at a comment level and present a model that can surface text likely to contain bias. Our main challenge is forcing the model to focus on signs of implicit bias, rather than other artifacts in the data. Thus, our methodology involves reducing the influence of confounds through propensity matching and adversarial learning. Our analysis shows how biased comments directed towards female politicians contain mixed criticisms, while comments directed towards other female public figures focus on appearance and sexualization. Ultimately, our work offers a way to capture subtle biases in various domains without relying on subjective human judgements.
Gender bias is highly impacting natural language processing applications. Word embeddings have clearly been proven both to keep and amplify gender biases that are present in current data sources. Recently, contextualized word embeddings have enhanced previous word embedding techniques by computing word vector representations dependent on the sentence they appear in. In this paper, we study the impact of this conceptual change in the word embedding computation in relation with gender bias. Our analysis includes different measures previously applied in the literature to standard word embeddings. Our findings suggest that contextualized word embeddings are less biased than standard ones even when the latter are debiased.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
