A Forensic Linguistic Analysis of Authorship Identification of Selected Anonymous Comments on ‘Gaza Attack’ in Threads Social Media Application

lect. Asma Asaad Thamer

doi:10.31185/eduj.Vol58.Iss1.4186

نویسندگان

lect. Asma Asaad Thamer College of Education for Women

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31185/eduj.Vol58.Iss1.4186

کلمات کلیدی:

anonymous comments, authorship identification, authorship characterization, authorship analysis

چکیده

The anonymous comments have become an integral part of the online world as a double -edged sword to either protect identity for avoiding harassment or engage in harmful behaviors without taking responsibility of the consequences. Since social media platforms allow posting of anonymous comments, the present paper deploys forensic authorship identification analysis to evaluate anonymous comments based on authorship identification and authorship characterization. The research generates its data from fifteen anonymous comments in Threads social media platform and qualitatively analyzed using available techniques of the forensic linguistics that include stylistics, sociolinguistics and dialectology to unveil the possible user's profile identity of the Threads users with anonymous identity. The findings of the study show that language always provides a valuable contextual footprint to uncover not only speaker's/writer's intentional and implicational meaning but unveiling those behind the production of the discourse. It also reveals that, in authorship identification methodologies, various forms of lexical choice and semiotic linguistic choice are significant factors for not only identifying but differentiating between a large set of anonymous authors in social media narratives which would be an important future endeavor.

keywords: forensic linguistics, anonymous comments, authorship identification, authorship characterization

دانلودها

دسترسی به دانلود اطلاعات مقدور نیست.

مراجع

Ainsworth J. & Juola P. (2019). Who wrote this?: Modern forensic authorship analysis as a model for valid forensic science, Washington University Law Review, 96(5), 1161-1189.

Bevendorff, J. et al. (2022). Overview of PAN 2022: Authorship verification, profiling irony and stereotype spreaders, style change detection, and trigger detection: Extended Abstract. In Advances in Information Retrieval: 44th European Conference on IR Research, ECIR 2022, Stavanger, Norway, April 10–14, 2022, Proceedings, Part II (pp. 331–338). Berlin: Springer International Publishing.

Chaski, C. E. (2005). Who’s at the keyboard? Authorship attribution in digital evidence investigations. International Journal of Digital Evidence, 4(1), 1-13.

C. Zhong, H.-w. Chang, D. Karamshuk, D. Lee, and N. Sastry, (2024) “Wearing many (social) hats: How different are your different social network personae?” in AAAI ICWSM.

Coulthard, M. (1994). On the use of corpora in the analysis of forensic texts. International Journal of Speech Language and the Law, 1(1), 27–43.

Coulthard, M. (2004). Author identification, idiolect, and linguistic uniqueness. Applied Linguistics, 25(4), 431–47.

Coulthard, M., Johnson, A., & Wright, D. (2017). An introduction to forensic linguistics: Language in evidence (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315630311

De Vel, O. et al., (2001). “Mining e-mail content for author identification forensics,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 30 (4), pp. 55–64.

Grant, T. (2008). Approaching questions in forensic authorship analysis. In J. Gibbons & M. T. Turell (Eds.), Dimensions of forensic linguistics (pp. 215–229). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.5.15gra

(2013). Method, consistency and distinctiveness in the analysis of SMS text messages. Journal of Law and Policy, 21(2), 467–94.

McEnery, T. & Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus linguistics: An introduction. 2nd Edition.: Edinburgh University Press.

McMenamin, G. R. (2002). Forensic linguistics: Advances in forensic stylistics. Boca Raton and New York: CRC Press.

(2010). Forensic stylistics. In The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics (pp. 539–557). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429030581-42

Misini, A. et al (2022). A Survey on authorship analysis tasks and techniques. Seeu Review 17 (2):153-167.

Robertson, J. (2013). Understanding how forensic science may contribute to miscarriages of justice. Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, 45(2), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00450618.2013.790477

Thamer, A. A. (2021). Discourse markers in selected English editorials: A communicative aspect between text producers and receivers. International Journal on Humanities and Social Sciences, (25), 215- 226. https://doi.org/10.33193/IJoHSS.25.2021.318

Yule, G. U. (1944). The statistical study of literary vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zhao, Y., & Zobel, J. (2005). Effective and Scalable Authorship Attribution Using Function Words. Asia Information Retrieval Symposium.

Websites of data:

1. https://www.threads.net/@binibini_nia/post/C9A0fo0NRe8?xmt=AQGzJLua-LN7PcImZXsZSUuUmjDzoUi34yhsNfWHDn2JnQ

2. https://www.threads.net/@ethancontent/post/DA1RW10o1KI?xmt=AQGzTdb5NOtsMVUel8kDJGsgeROUluPFs0FeA6BUeUU0DA

3. https://www.threads.net/@eye.on.palestine/post/DA3X2ZDsHB_?xmt=AQGzI_YLLS3j2ekp7E1KIUyiQo_-vHYDglEL3Q287hK0sA

4. https://www.threads.net/@dubai_foreigner_community/post/C_MJYO2SnsT?xmt=AQGzSpQJ_2FxB1GHv9ImF0zrdV7s5PnYMSJJOGHFjkHHrw

5. https://www.threads.net/@bridgesforbethlehem/post/C2SZTEgORTY?xmt=AQGzVO7ms4eMuO4Hnmj32qKOpqCqKws68qAglwsYYP1NLQ

6. https://www.threads.net/@akhy_chad_24/post/DA_G37jAYS7?xmt=AQGzM0BeaEfacA9l7ckb6JCzoO0UVX-7miHOhLWyY4HBXQ

7. https://www.threads.net/@jociek1/post/DBBYafezBZv?xmt=AQGzyrI_IB4H4NnzQg_tNYVR4Fp1F3_Dc2_K3TLRGLbmXw

8. https://www.threads.net/@zahra_shahhhh/post/C9KvYIvIWXV?xmt=AQGzMc_7UyQ5i81BGydImazDIfvNH0ddGkjAQac4k0LE0A

9. https://www.threads.net/@thorinseex/post/DCoCTquIzBX?xmt=AQGzS2uhv_qPYuwBhMldE5KRVms4fCejtH-0mJn1qbQkOQ