The Ecological Fallacy in Annotation: Modeling Human Label Variation goes beyond Sociodemographics

Matthias Orlikowski, Paul Röttger, Philipp Cimiano, Dirk Hovy

Main: Ethics and NLP Main-poster Paper

Poster Session 3: Ethics and NLP (Poster)
Conference Room: Frontenac Ballroom and Queen's Quay
Conference Time: July 11, 09:00-10:30 (EDT) (America/Toronto)
Global Time: July 11, Poster Session 3 (13:00-14:30 UTC)
Keywords: human factors in nlp
TLDR: Many NLP tasks exhibit human label variation, where different annotators give different labels to the same texts. This variation is known to depend, at least in part, on the sociodemographics of annotators. Recent research aims to model individual annotator behaviour rather than predicting aggregate...
You can open the #paper-P3155 channel in a separate window.
Abstract: Many NLP tasks exhibit human label variation, where different annotators give different labels to the same texts. This variation is known to depend, at least in part, on the sociodemographics of annotators. Recent research aims to model individual annotator behaviour rather than predicting aggregated labels, and we would expect that sociodemographic information is useful for these models. On the other hand, the ecological fallacy states that aggregate group behaviour, such as the behaviour of the average female annotator, does not necessarily explain individual behaviour. To account for sociodemographics in models of individual annotator behaviour, we introduce group-specific layers to multi-annotator models. In a series of experiments for toxic content detection, we find that explicitly accounting for sociodemographic attributes in this way does not significantly improve model performance. This result shows that individual annotation behaviour depends on much more than just sociodemographics.