Journals / Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1

Effects of Feature Extraction and Classification Methods on Cyberbully Detection

Pages
190–200
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Experimental results indicate that the best classification results are obtained when alphabetic tokenization, no stemming, and no stopwords removal are applied.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Cyberbullying is defined as an aggressive, intentional action against a defenseless person by using the Internet, or other electronic contents.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study we show the effects of feature extraction, feature selection, and classification methods that are used, on the performance of automatic detection of cyberbullying.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Experimental results indicate that the best classification results are obtained when alphabetic tokenization, no stemming, and no stopwords removal are applied.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cyberbullying · Preprocessing · Feature selection

Özet

Cyberbullying is defined as an aggressive, intentional action against a defenseless person by using the Internet, or other electronic contents. Researchers have found that many of the bullying cases have tragically ended in suicides; hence automatic detection of cyberbullying has become important. In this study we show the effects of feature extraction, feature selection, and classification methods that are used, on the performance of automatic detection of cyberbullying. To perform the experiments FormSpring.me dataset is used and the effects of preprocessing methods; several classifiers like C4.5, Naïve Bayes, kNN, and SVM; and information gain and chi square feature selection methods are investigated. Experimental results indicate that the best classification results are obtained when alphabetic tokenization, no stemming, and no stopwords removal are applied. Using feature selection also improves cyberbully detection performance. When classifiers are compared, C4.5 performs the best for the used dataset.

🔖

Cite This Article

EŞSİZ, E. S., ÖZEL, S. A. (2017). Effects of Feature Extraction and Classification Methods on Cyberbully Detection. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 1, 190–200. https://ajindex.com/articles/310741

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Snakenborg, J., Van Acker, R., and Gable, R. A. 2011. Cyberbullying: Prevention and Intervention to Protect our Children and Youth. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55(2011), 88-95
  2. Smith, P.K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., and Tippett, N. 2008. Cyberbullying: its Nature and Impact in Secondary School Pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 49(2008), 376–385
  3. Li, Q. 2006. Cyberbullying in Schools: A Research of Gender Differences. School Psychology International, 27(2)(2006), 157-170
  4. Agatston, P.W., Kowalski, R., and Limber, S. 2007. Students’ Perspectives on Cyber Bullying. Journal of Adolescent Health 41(2007), S59–S60
  5. Beran, T., and Li, Q. 2005. Cyber-harassment: A Study of a New Method for an old Behavior. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2005), 265-277
  6. Hinduja, S., and Patchin, J. W. 2008. Cyberbullying: An Exploratory Analysis of Factors Related to Offending and Victimization. Deviant Behavior, 29(2008), 129-156
  7. Kowalski, R. M., and Limber, S. P. 2007. Electronic Bullying among Middle School Students. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(6, Suppl. 1)(2007), 22-30
  8. Ortega, R., Elipe, P., Mora-Merchán, J. A., Calmaestra, J., and Vega, E. 2009. The Emotional Impact on Victims of Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying: A study of Spanish Adolescents. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 217(4)(2009), 197-204
  9. Patchin, J.W., and Hinduja, S. 2006. Bullies Move Beyond the Schoolyard: A Preliminary Look at Cyberbullying. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice 4(2006), 148–169
  10. Rivers, I., and Noret, N. 2010. “I h8 u”: Findings from a Five-year Study of Text and Email Bullying. British Educational Research Journal, 36(2010), 643-671
  11. Campbell, M.A. 2005. Cyber Bullying: An Old Problem in a New Guise? Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling 15(2005), 68–76
  12. What is Cyber Bullying? http://www.stopcyberbullying.org/ (Access Date: 15.12.2015
  13. Barlett, C., and Coyne, S.M. 2014. A Meta Analysis of Sex Differences in Cyber-Bullying Behavior: The Moderating Role of Age: Sex Differences in Cyber-Bullying. Aggressive Behavior 40(2014), 474–488
  14. Özdemir, Y. 2014. Cyber Victimization and Adolescent Self-esteem: The Role of Communication with Parents: Cyber Victimization and Self-esteem. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 17(2014), 255–263
  15. Yin, D., Xue, Z., Hong, L., Davison, B. D., Kontostathis, A., an