Most events in the world receive at most brief coverage by the news media. Occasionally, however, an event will trigger a media storm, with voluminous and widespread coverage lasting for weeks instead of days. In this work, we develop and apply a pairwise article similarity model, allowing us to identify story clusters in corpora covering local and national online news, and thereby create a comprehensive corpus of media storms over a nearly two year period. Using this corpus, we investigate media storms at a new level of granularity, allowing us to validate claims about storm evolution and topical distribution, and provide empirical support for previously hypothesized patterns of influence of storms on media coverage and intermedia agenda setting.

Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to perform well at a variety of syntactic, discourse, and reasoning tasks. While LLMs are increasingly deployed in many forms including conversational agents that interact with humans, we lack a grounded benchmark to measure how well LLMs understand social language. Here, we introduce a new theory-driven benchmark, SocKET, that contains 58 NLP tasks testing social knowledge which we group into five categories: humor & sarcasm, offensiveness, sentiment & emotion, and trustworthiness. In tests on the benchmark, we demonstrate that current models attain only moderate performance but reveal significant potential for task transfer among different types and categories of tasks, which were predicted from theory. Through zero-shot evaluations, we show that pretrained models already possess some innate but limited capabilities of social language understanding and training on one category of tasks can improve zero-shot testing on others. Our benchmark provides a systematic way to analyze model performance on an important dimension of language and points to clear room for improvement to build more socially-aware LLMs. The resources are released at https://github.com/minjechoi/SOCKET.

Annotators are not fungible. Their demographics, life experiences, and backgrounds all contribute to how they label data. However, NLP has only recently considered how annotator identity might influence their decisions. Here, we present POPQUORN (the Potato-Prolific dataset for Question-Answering, Offensiveness, text Rewriting and politeness rating with demographic Nuance). POPQUORN contains 45,000 annotations from 1,484 annotators, drawn from a representative sample regarding sex, age, and race as the US population. Through a series of analyses, we show that annotators’ background plays a significant role in their judgments. Further, our work shows that backgrounds not previously considered in NLP (e.g., education), are meaningful and should be considered. Our study suggests that understanding the background of annotators and collecting labels from a demographically balanced pool of crowd workers is important to reduce the bias of datasets. The dataset, annotator background, and annotation interface are available at https://github.com/Jiaxin-Pei/potato-prolific-dataset.

Intimacy is an important social aspect of language. Computational modeling of intimacy in language could help many downstream applications like dialogue systems and offensiveness detection. Despite its importance, resources and approaches on modeling textual intimacy remain rare. To address this gap, we introduce MINT, a new Multilingual intimacy analysis dataset covering 13,372 tweets in 10 languages including English, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Korean, Dutch, Chinese, Hindi, and Arabic along with SemEval 2023 Task 9: Multilingual Tweet Intimacy Analysis. Our task attracted 45 participants from around the world. While the participants are able to achieve overall good performance on languages in the training set, zero-shot prediction of intimacy in unseen languages remains challenging. Here we provide an overview of the task, summaries of the common approaches, and potential future directions on modeling intimacy across languages. All the relevant resources are available at https: //sites.google.com/umich.edu/ semeval-2023-tweet-intimacy.

Linguistic style matching (LSM) in conversations can be reflective of several aspects of social influence such as power or persuasion. However, how LSM relates to the outcomes of online communication on platforms such as Reddit is an unknown question. In this study, we analyze a large corpus of two-party conversation threads in Reddit where we identify all occurrences of LSM using two types of style: the use of function words and formality. Using this framework, we examine how levels of LSM differ in conversations depending on several social factors within Reddit: post and subreddit features, conversation depth, user tenure, and the controversiality of a comment. Finally, we measure the change of LSM following loss of status after community banning. Our findings reveal the interplay of LSM in Reddit conversations with several community metrics, suggesting the importance of understanding conversation engagement when understanding community dynamics.

Understanding interpersonal communication requires, in part, understanding the social context and norms in which a message is said. However, current methods for identifying offensive content in such communication largely operate independent of context, with only a few approaches considering community norms or prior conversation as context. Here, we introduce a new approach to identifying inappropriate communication by explicitly modeling the social relationship between the individuals. We introduce a new dataset of contextually-situated judgments of appropriateness and show that large language models can readily incorporate relationship information to accurately identify appropriateness in a given context. Using data from online conversations and movie dialogues, we provide insight into how the relationships themselves function as implicit norms and quantify the degree to which context-sensitivity is needed in different conversation settings. Further, we also demonstrate that contextual-appropriateness judgments are predictive of other social factors expressed in language such as condescension and politeness.

Reddit is home to a broad spectrum of political activity, and users signal their political affiliations in multiple ways—from self-declarations to community participation. Frequently, computational studies have treated political users as a single bloc, both in developing models to infer political leaning and in studying political behavior. Here, we test this assumption of political users and show that commonly-used political-inference models do not generalize, indicating heterogeneous types of political users. The models remain imprecise at best for most users, regardless of which sources of data or methods are used. Across a 14-year longitudinal analysis, we demonstrate that the choice in definition of a political user has significant implications for behavioral analysis. Controlling for multiple factors, political users are more toxic on the platform and inter-party interactions are even more toxic—but not all political users behave this way. Last, we identify a subset of political users who repeatedly flip affiliations, showing that these users are the most controversial of all, acting as provocateurs by more frequently bringing up politics, and are more likely to be banned, suspended, or deleted.

We review the state of research on empathy in natural language processing and identify the following issues: (1) empathy definitions are absent or abstract, which (2) leads to low construct validity and reproducibility. Moreover, (3) emotional empathy is overemphasized, skewing our focus to a narrow subset of simplified tasks. We believe these issues hinder research progress and argue that current directions will benefit from a clear conceptualization that includes operationalizing cognitive empathy components. Our main objectives are to provide insight and guidance on empathy conceptualization for NLP research objectives and to encourage researchers to pursue the overlooked opportunities in this area, highly relevant, e.g., for clinical and educational sectors.

Toxic language can take many forms, from explicit hate speech to more subtle microaggressions. Within this space, models identifying transphobic language have largely focused on overt forms. However, a more pernicious and subtle source of transphobic comments comes in the form of statements made by Trans-exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs); these statements often appear seemingly-positive and promote women’s causes and issues, while simultaneously denying the inclusion of transgender women as women. Here, we introduce two models to mitigate this antisocial behavior. The first model identifies TERF users in social media, recognizing that these users are a main source of transphobic material that enters mainstream discussion and whom other users may not desire to engage with in good faith. The second model tackles the harder task of recognizing the masked rhetoric of TERF messages and introduces a new dataset to support this task. Finally, we discuss the ethics of deploying these models to mitigate the harm of this language, arguing for a balanced approach that allows for restorative interactions.

Thousands of new news articles appear daily in outlets in different languages. Understanding which articles refer to the same story can not only improve applications like news aggregation but enable cross-linguistic analysis of media consumption and attention. However, assessing the similarity of stories in news articles is challenging due to the different dimensions in which a story might vary, e.g., two articles may have substantial textual overlap but describe similar events that happened years apart. To address this challenge, we introduce a new dataset of nearly 10,000 news article pairs spanning 18 language combinations annotated for seven dimensions of similarity as SemEval 2022 Task 8. Here, we present an overview of the task, the best performing submissions, and the frontiers and challenges for measuring multilingual news article similarity. While the participants of this SemEval task contributed very strong models, achieving up to 0.818 correlation with gold standard labels across languages, human annotators are capable of reaching higher correlations, suggesting space for further progress.

Citation context analysis (CCA) is an important task in natural language processing that studies how and why scholars discuss each others’ work. Despite decades of study, computational methods for CCA have largely relied on overly-simplistic assumptions of how authors cite, which ignore several important phenomena. For instance, scholarly papers often contain rich discussions of cited work that span multiple sentences and express multiple intents concurrently. Yet, recent work in CCA is often approached as a single-sentence, single-label classification task, and thus many datasets used to develop modern computational approaches fail to capture this interesting discourse. To address this research gap, we highlight three understudied phenomena for CCA and release MULTICITE, a new dataset of 12.6K citation contexts from 1.2K computational linguistics papers that fully models these phenomena. Not only is it the largest collection of expert-annotated citation contexts to-date, MULTICITE contains multi-sentence, multi-label citation contexts annotated through-out entire full paper texts. We demonstrate how MULTICITE can enable the development of new computational methods on three important CCA tasks. We release our code and dataset at https://github.com/allenai/multicite.

Whether the media faithfully communicate scientific information has long been a core issue to the science community. Automatically identifying paraphrased scientific findings could enable large-scale tracking and analysis of information changes in the science communication process, but this requires systems to understand the similarity between scientific information across multiple domains. To this end, we present the SCIENTIFIC PARAPHRASE AND INFORMATION CHANGE DATASET (SPICED), the first paraphrase dataset of scientific findings annotated for degree of information change. SPICED contains 6,000 scientific finding pairs extracted from news stories, social media discussions, and full texts of original papers. We demonstrate that SPICED poses a challenging task and that models trained on SPICED improve downstream performance on evidence retrieval for fact checking of real-world scientific claims. Finally, we show that models trained on SPICED can reveal large-scale trends in the degrees to which people and organizations faithfully communicate new scientific findings. Data, code, and pre-trained models are available at http://www.copenlu.com/publication/2022_emnlp_wright/.

We present POTATO, the Portable text annotation tool, a free, fully open-sourced annotation system that 1) supports labeling many types of text and multimodal data; 2) offers easy-to-configure features to maximize the productivity of both deployers and annotators (convenient templates for common ML/NLP tasks, active learning, keypress shortcuts, keyword highlights, tooltips); and 3) supports a high degree of customization (editable UI, inserting pre-screening questions, attention and qualification tests). Experiments over two annotation tasks suggest that POTATO improves labeling speed through its specially-designed productivity features, especially for long documents and complex tasks. POTATO is available at https://github.com/davidjurgens/potato and will continue to be updated.

Dependency parsing is increasingly the popular parsing formalism in practice. This assignment provides a practice exercise in implementing the shift-reduce dependency parser of Chen and Manning (2014). This parser is a two-layer feed-forward neural network, which students implement in PyTorch, providing practice in developing deep learning models and exposure to developing parser models.

Word vector representations are an essential part of an NLP curriculum. Here, we describe a homework that has students implement a popular method for learning word vectors, word2vec. Students implement the core parts of the method, including text preprocessing, negative sampling, and gradient descent. Starter code provides guidance and handles basic operations, which allows students to focus on the conceptually challenging aspects. After generating their vectors, students evaluate them using qualitative and quantitative tests.

Online conversations include more than just text. Increasingly, image-based responses such as memes and animated gifs serve as culturally recognized and often humorous responses in conversation. However, while NLP has broadened to multimodal models, conversational dialog systems have largely focused only on generating text replies. Here, we introduce a new dataset of 1.56M text-gif conversation turns and introduce a new multimodal conversational model Pepe the King Prawn for selecting gif-based replies. We demonstrate that our model produces relevant and high-quality gif responses and, in a large randomized control trial of multiple models replying to real users, we show that our model replies with gifs that are significantly better received by the community.

Online platforms and communities establish their own norms that govern what behavior is acceptable within the community. Substantial effort in NLP has focused on identifying unacceptable behaviors and, recently, on forecasting them before they occur. However, these efforts have largely focused on toxicity as the sole form of community norm violation. Such focus has overlooked the much larger set of rules that moderators enforce. Here, we introduce a new dataset focusing on a more complete spectrum of community norms and their violations in the local conversational and global community contexts. We introduce a series of models that use this data to develop context- and community-sensitive norm violation detection, showing that these changes give high performance.

An individual’s variation in writing style is often a function of both social and personal attributes. While structured social variation has been extensively studied, e.g., gender based variation, far less is known about how to characterize individual styles due to their idiosyncratic nature. We introduce a new approach to studying idiolects through a massive cross-author comparison to identify and encode stylistic features. The neural model achieves strong performance at authorship identification on short texts and through an analogy-based probing task, showing that the learned representations exhibit surprising regularities that encode qualitative and quantitative shifts of idiolectal styles. Through text perturbation, we quantify the relative contributions of different linguistic elements to idiolectal variation. Furthermore, we provide a description of idiolects through measuring inter- and intra-author variation, showing that variation in idiolects is often distinctive yet consistent.

Individuals signal aspects of their identity and beliefs through linguistic choices. Studying these choices in aggregate allows us to examine large-scale attitude shifts within a population. Here, we develop computational methods to study word choice within a sociolinguistic lexical variable—alternate words used to express the same concept—in order to test for change in the United States towards sexuality and gender. We examine two variables: i) referents to significant others, such as the word “partner” and ii) referents to an indefinite person, both of which could optionally be marked with gender. The linguistic choices in each variable allow us to study increased rates of acceptances of gay marriage and gender equality, respectively. In longitudinal analyses across Twitter and Reddit over 87M messages, we demonstrate that attitudes are changing but that these changes are driven by specific demographics within the United States. Further, in a quasi-causal analysis, we show that passages of Marriage Equality Acts in different states are drivers of linguistic change.

Certainty and uncertainty are fundamental to science communication. Hedges have widely been used as proxies for uncertainty. However, certainty is a complex construct, with authors expressing not only the degree but the type and aspects of uncertainty in order to give the reader a certain impression of what is known. Here, we introduce a new study of certainty that models both the level and the aspects of certainty in scientific findings. Using a new dataset of 2167 annotated scientific findings, we demonstrate that hedges alone account for only a partial explanation of certainty. We show that both the overall certainty and individual aspects can be predicted with pre-trained language models, providing a more complete picture of the author’s intended communication. Downstream analyses on 431K scientific findings from news and scientific abstracts demonstrate that modeling sentence-level and aspect-level certainty is meaningful for areas like science communication. Both the model and datasets used in this paper are released at https://blablablab.si.umich.edu/projects/certainty/.

This paper presents our system submission to task 5: Toxic Spans Detection of the SemEval-2021 competition. The competition aims at detecting the spans that make a toxic span toxic. In this paper, we demonstrate our system for detecting toxic spans, which includes expanding the toxic training set with Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME), fine-tuning RoBERTa model for detection, and error analysis. We found that feeding the model with an expanded training set using Reddit comments of polarized-toxicity and labeling with LIME on top of logistic regression classification could help RoBERTa more accurately learn to recognize toxic spans. We achieved a span-level F1 score of 0.6715 on the testing phase. Our quantitative and qualitative results show that the predictions from our system could be a good supplement to the gold training set’s annotations.

New words are regularly introduced to communities, yet not all of these words persist in a community’s lexicon. Among the many factors contributing to lexical change, we focus on the understudied effect of social networks. We conduct a large-scale analysis of over 80k neologisms in 4420 online communities across a decade. Using Poisson regression and survival analysis, our study demonstrates that the community’s network structure plays a significant role in lexical change. Apart from overall size, properties including dense connections, the lack of local clusters, and more external contacts promote lexical innovation and retention. Unlike offline communities, these topic-based communities do not experience strong lexical leveling despite increased contact but accommodate more niche words. Our work provides support for the sociolinguistic hypothesis that lexical change is partially shaped by the structure of the underlying network but also uncovers findings specific to online communities.

The framing of political issues can influence policy and public opinion. Even though the public plays a key role in creating and spreading frames, little is known about how ordinary people on social media frame political issues. By creating a new dataset of immigration-related tweets labeled for multiple framing typologies from political communication theory, we develop supervised models to detect frames. We demonstrate how users’ ideology and region impact framing choices, and how a message’s framing influences audience responses. We find that the more commonly-used issue-generic frames obscure important ideological and regional patterns that are only revealed by immigration-specific frames. Furthermore, frames oriented towards human interests, culture, and politics are associated with higher user engagement. This large-scale analysis of a complex social and linguistic phenomenon contributes to both NLP and social science research.

Online social media platforms increasingly rely on Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to detect abusive content at scale in order to mitigate the harms it causes to their users. However, these techniques suffer from various sampling and association biases present in training data, often resulting in sub-par performance on content relevant to marginalized groups, potentially furthering disproportionate harms towards them. Studies on such biases so far have focused on only a handful of axes of disparities and subgroups that have annotations/lexicons available. Consequently, biases concerning non-Western contexts are largely ignored in the literature. In this paper, we introduce a weakly supervised method to robustly detect lexical biases in broader geo-cultural contexts. Through a case study on a publicly available toxicity detection model, we demonstrate that our method identifies salient groups of cross-geographic errors, and, in a follow up, demonstrate that these groupings reflect human judgments of offensive and inoffensive language in those geographic contexts. We also conduct analysis of a model trained on a dataset with ground truth labels to better understand these biases, and present preliminary mitigation experiments.

Offering condolence is a natural reaction to hearing someone’s distress. Individuals frequently express distress in social media, where some communities can provide support. However, not all condolence is equal—trite responses offer little actual support despite their good intentions. Here, we develop computational tools to create a massive dataset of 11.4M expressions of distress and 2.8M corresponding offerings of condolence in order to examine the dynamics of condolence online. Our study reveals widespread disparity in what types of distress receive supportive condolence rather than just engagement. Building on studies from social psychology, we analyze the language of condolence and develop a new dataset for quantifying the empathy in a condolence using appraisal theory. Finally, we demonstrate that the features of condolence individuals find most helpful online differ substantially in their features from those seen in interpersonal settings.

Intimacy is a fundamental aspect of how we relate to others in social settings. Language encodes the social information of intimacy through both topics and other more subtle cues (such as linguistic hedging and swearing). Here, we introduce a new computational framework for studying expressions of the intimacy in language with an accompanying dataset and deep learning model for accurately predicting the intimacy level of questions (Pearson r = 0.87). Through analyzing a dataset of 80.5M questions across social media, books, and films, we show that individuals employ interpersonal pragmatic moves in their language to align their intimacy with social settings. Then, in three studies, we further demonstrate how individuals modulate their intimacy to match social norms around gender, social distance, and audience, each validating key findings from studies in social psychology. Our work demonstrates that intimacy is a pervasive and impactful social dimension of language.

Online abusive behavior affects millions and the NLP community has attempted to mitigate this problem by developing technologies to detect abuse. However, current methods have largely focused on a narrow definition of abuse to detriment of victims who seek both validation and solutions. In this position paper, we argue that the community needs to make three substantive changes: (1) expanding our scope of problems to tackle both more subtle and more serious forms of abuse, (2) developing proactive technologies that counter or inhibit abuse before it harms, and (3) reframing our effort within a framework of justice to promote healthy communities.

Multilingual individuals code switch between languages as a part of a complex communication process. However, most computational studies have examined only one or a handful of contextual factors predictive of switching. Here, we examine Naija-English code switching in a rich contextual environment to understand the social and topical factors eliciting a switch. We introduce a new corpus of 330K articles and accompanying 389K comments labeled for code switching behavior. In modeling whether a comment will switch, we show that topic-driven variation, tribal affiliation, emotional valence, and audience design all play complementary roles in behavior.

Microaggressions are subtle, often veiled, manifestations of human biases. These uncivil interactions can have a powerful negative impact on people by marginalizing minorities and disadvantaged groups. The linguistic subtlety of microaggressions in communication has made it difficult for researchers to analyze their exact nature, and to quantify and extract microaggressions automatically. Specifically, the lack of a corpus of real-world microaggressions and objective criteria for annotating them have prevented researchers from addressing these problems at scale. In this paper, we devise a general but nuanced, computationally operationalizable typology of microaggressions based on a small subset of data that we have. We then create two datasets: one with examples of diverse types of microaggressions recollected by their targets, and another with gender-based microaggressions in public conversations on social media. We introduce a new, more objective, criterion for annotation and an active-learning based procedure that increases the likelihood of surfacing posts containing microaggressions. Finally, we analyze the trends that emerge from these new datasets.

Citations have long been used to characterize the state of a scientific field and to identify influential works. However, writers use citations for different purposes, and this varied purpose influences uptake by future scholars. Unfortunately, our understanding of how scholars use and frame citations has been limited to small-scale manual citation analysis of individual papers. We perform the largest behavioral study of citations to date, analyzing how scientific works frame their contributions through different types of citations and how this framing affects the field as a whole. We introduce a new dataset of nearly 2,000 citations annotated for their function, and use it to develop a state-of-the-art classifier and label the papers of an entire field: Natural Language Processing. We then show how differences in framing affect scientific uptake and reveal the evolution of the publication venues and the field as a whole. We demonstrate that authors are sensitive to discourse structure and publication venue when citing, and that how a paper frames its work through citations is predictive of the citation count it will receive. Finally, we use changes in citation framing to show that the field of NLP is undergoing a significant increase in consensus.

People use online platforms to seek out support for their informational and emotional needs. Here, we ask what effect does revealing one’s gender have on receiving support. To answer this, we create (i) a new dataset and method for identifying supportive replies and (ii) new methods for inferring gender from text and name. We apply these methods to create a new massive corpus of 102M online interactions with gender-labeled users, each rated by degree of supportiveness. Our analysis shows wide-spread and consistent disparity in support: identifying as a woman is associated with higher rates of support - but also higher rates of disparagement.

Language identification (LID) is a critical first step for processing multilingual text. Yet most LID systems are not designed to handle the linguistic diversity of global platforms like Twitter, where local dialects and rampant code-switching lead language classifiers to systematically miss minority dialect speakers and multilingual speakers. We propose a new dataset and a character-based sequence-to-sequence model for LID designed to support dialectal and multilingual language varieties. Our model achieves state-of-the-art performance on multiple LID benchmarks. Furthermore, in a case study using Twitter for health tracking, our method substantially increases the availability of texts written by underrepresented populations, enabling the development of “socially inclusive” NLP tools.

Characters form the focus of various studies of literary works, including social network analysis, archetype induction, and plot comparison. The recent rise in the computational modelling of literary works has produced a proportional rise in the demand for character-annotated literary corpora. However, automatically identifying characters is an open problem and there is low availability of literary texts with manually labelled characters. To address the latter problem, this work presents three contributions: (1) a comprehensive scheme for manually resolving mentions to characters in texts. (2) A novel collaborative annotation tool, CHARLES (CHAracter Resolution Label-Entry System) for character annotation and similiar cross-document tagging tasks. (3) The character annotations resulting from a pilot study on the novel Pride and Prejudice, demonstrating the scheme and tool facilitate the efficient production of high-quality annotations. We expect this work to motivate the further production of annotated literary corpora to help meet the demand of the community.

Semantic similarity forms a central component in many NLP systems, from lexical semantics, to part of speech tagging, to social media analysis. Recent years have seen a renewed interest in developing new similarity techniques, buoyed in part by work on embeddings and by SemEval tasks in Semantic Textual Similarity and Cross-Level Semantic Similarity. The increased interest has led to hundreds of techniques for measuring semantic similarity, which makes it difficult for practitioners to identify which state-of-the-art techniques are applicable and easily integrated into projects and for researchers to identify which aspects of the problem require future research.This tutorial synthesizes the current state of the art for measuring semantic similarity for all types of conceptual or textual pairs and presents a broad overview of current techniques, what resources they use, and the particular inputs or domains to which the methods are most applicable. We survey methods ranging from corpus-based approaches operating on massive or domains-specific corpora to those leveraging structural information from expert-based or collaboratively-constructed lexical resources. Furthermore, we review work on multiple similarity tasks from sense-based comparisons to word, sentence, and document-sized comparisons and highlight general-purpose methods capable of comparing multiple types of inputs. Where possible, we also identify techniques that have been demonstrated to successfully operate in multilingual or cross-lingual settings.Our tutorial provides a clear overview of currently-available tools and their strengths for practitioners who need out of the box solutions and provides researchers with an understanding of the limitations of current state of the art and what open problems remain in the field. Given the breadth of available approaches, participants will also receive a detailed bibliography of approaches (including those not directly covered in the tutorial), annotated according to the approaches abilities, and pointers to when open-source implementations of the algorithms may be obtained.

Word sense annotation is a challenging task where annotators distinguish which meaning of a word is present in a given context. In some contexts, a word usage may elicit multiple interpretations, resulting either in annotators disagreeing or in allowing the usage to be annotated with multiple senses. While some works have allowed the latter, the extent to which multiple sense annotations are needed has not been assessed. The present work analyzes a dataset of instances annotated with multiple WordNet senses to assess the causes of the multiple interpretations and their relative frequencies, along with the effect of the multiple senses on the contextual interpretation. We show that contextual underspecification is the primary cause of multiple interpretations but that syllepsis still accounts for more than a third of the cases. In addition, we show that sense coarsening can only partially remove the need for labeling instances with multiple senses and we provide suggestions for how future sense annotation guidelines might be developed to account for this need.

Annotated data is prerequisite for many NLP applications. Acquiring large-scale annotated corpora is a major bottleneck, requiring significant time and resources. Recent work has proposed turning annotation into a game to increase its appeal and lower its cost; however, current games are largely text-based and closely resemble traditional annotation tasks. We propose a new linguistic annotation paradigm that produces annotations from playing graphical video games. The effectiveness of this design is demonstrated using two video games: one to create a mapping from WordNet senses to images, and a second game that performs Word Sense Disambiguation. Both games produce accurate results. The first game yields annotation quality equal to that of experts and a cost reduction of 73% over equivalent crowdsourcing; the second game provides a 16.3% improvement in accuracy over current state-of-the-art sense disambiguation games with WordNet.