Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

A longitudinal study of the top 1% toxic Twitter profiles

Hina Qayyum, Benjamin Zi Hao Zhao, Ian D. Wood, Muhammad Ikram, Mohamed Ali Kaafar, Nicolas Kourtellis

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference proceeding contributionpeer-review

Abstract

Toxicity is endemic to online social networks (OSNs) including Twitter. It follows a Pareto-like distribution where most of the toxicity is generated by a very small number of profiles and as such, analyzing and characterizing these "toxic profiles"is critical. Prior research has largely focused on sporadic, event-centric toxic content (i.e., tweets) to characterize toxicity on the platform. Instead, we approach the problem of characterizing toxic content from a profile-centric point of view. We study 143K Twitter profiles and focus on the behavior of the top 1% producers of toxic content on Twitter, based on toxicity scores of their tweets availed by Perspective API. With a total of 293M tweets, spanning 16 years of activity, the longitudinal data allows us to reconstruct the timelines of all profiles involved. We use these timelines to gauge the behavior of the most toxic Twitter profiles compared to the rest of the Twitter population. We study the pattern of tweet posting from highly toxic accounts, based on the frequency and how prolific they are, the nature of hashtags and URLs, profile metadata, and Botometer scores. We find that the highly toxic profiles post coherent and well-articulated content, their tweets keep to a narrow theme with lower diversity in hashtags, URLs, and domains, they are thematically similar to each other, and have a high likelihood of bot-like behavior, likely to have progenitors with intentions to influence, based on high fake followers score. Our work contributes insight into the top 1% toxic profiles on Twitter and establishes the profile-centric approach to investigate toxicity on Twitter to be beneficial. The identification of the most toxic profiles can aid in the reporting and suspension of such profiles, making Twitter a better place for discussions. Finally, we contribute to the research community with this large-scale and longitudinal dataset1, annotated with six types of toxic scores.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationWebSci '23
Subtitle of host publicationproceedings of the 15th ACM Web Science Conference 2023
Place of PublicationNew York
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Pages292-303
Number of pages12
ISBN (Electronic)9798400700897
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2023
Event15th ACM Web Science Conference, WebSci 2023 - Austin, United States
Duration: 30 Apr 20231 May 2023

Conference

Conference15th ACM Web Science Conference, WebSci 2023
Country/TerritoryUnited States
CityAustin
Period30/04/231/05/23

Keywords

  • Twitter
  • profile
  • toxicity
  • longitudinal
  • measurement
  • Perspective score

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A longitudinal study of the top 1% toxic Twitter profiles'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this