Child Abuse and Domestic Abuse: Content and Feature Analysis from Social Media Disclosures

  • Sudha Subramani
  • Hua Wang
  • Md Rafiqul Islam
  • Anwaar Ulhaq
  • Manjula O’Connor
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10837)


Due to increase in popularity of social media, people have started discussing their thoughts and opinions in the form of textual posts. Currently, the people tend to disclose even the socially tabooed topics such as Child Abuse (CA), and Domestic Abuse (DA) to receive the desired response and social support in turn. The increasing volume of abuse related posts being shared on social media is of great interest for public health sectors and family welfare organizations to monitor the public health and promote support services. However, due to the large volume, high velocity and huge variety of context and content of user generated data, it is difficult to mine the different kinds of abuse (CA and DA) related posts from other general posts, that flood over the web. Hence, this paper aims to discover and differentiate the characteristics of CA and DA posts from the massive user generated posts, with the underlying context. Various features such as psycholinguistic, textual and sentimental features are analyzed and Machine Learning techniques are trained to analyze the predictive power of extracted features. Hence, the resulting model achieves more predictive power with high accuracy in classifying possible cases of abuse related posts from diverse user posts.


Child Abuse Domestic Abuse Social media Text mining Machine learning 


  1. 1.
    World Health Organization: understanding and addressing violence against women: sexual violence (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    World Health Organization: global and regional estimates of violence against women: prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. World Health Organization (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van der Kolk, B.A.: This issue: child abuse & victimization. Psychiatr. Ann. 35(5), 374–378 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Browne, A., Finkelhor, D.: Impact of child sexual abuse: a review of the research. Psychol. bull. 99(1), 66 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang, J., Cong, G., Zhao, W.X., Li, X.: Mining user intents in Twitter: a semi-supervised approach to inferring intent categories for tweets. In: AAAI, pp. 318–324 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta, V., Varshney, D., Jhamtani, H., Kedia, D., Karwa, S.: Identifying purchase intent from social posts. In: ICWSM (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Turner, R.J., Brown, R.L.: Social support and mental health. In: A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health: Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems, vol. 2, pp. 200–212 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    O’Connor, B., Balasubramanyan, R., Routledge, B.R., Smith, N.A., et al.: From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In: ICWSM, vol. 11, pp. 122–129 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sakaki, T., Okazaki, M., Matsuo, Y.: Earthquake shakes Twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 851–860. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chunara, R., Andrews, J.R., Brownstein, J.S.: Social and news media enable estimation of epidemiological patterns early in the 2010 Haitian cholera outbreak. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 86(1), 39–45 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reavley, N.J., Pilkington, P.D.: Use of Twitter to monitor attitudes toward depression and schizophrenia: an exploratory study. PeerJ 2, e647 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martínez-Pérez, B., de la Torre-Díez, I., Bargiela-Flórez, B., López-Coronado, M., Rodrigues, J.J.: Content analysis of neurodegenerative and mental diseases social groups. Health Inform. J. 21(4), 267–283 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Andalibi, N., Öztürk, P., Forte, A.: Sensitive self-disclosures, responses, and social support on Instagram: the case of# depression. In: CSCW, pp. 1485–1500 (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, H., Jiang, X., Kambourakis, G.: Special issue on security, privacy and trust in network-based big data. Inf. Sci. Int. J. 318(C), 48–50 (2015)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Qin, Y., Sheng, Q.Z., Falkner, N.J., Dustdar, S., Wang, H., Vasilakos, A.V.: When things matter: a survey on data-centric internet of things. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 64, 137–153 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, H., Zhang, Z., Taleb, T.: Special issue on security and privacy of IoT. World Wide Web 21(1), 1–6 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sun, X., Wang, H., Li, J., Zhang, Y.: Satisfying privacy requirements before data anonymization. Comput. J. 55(4), 422–437 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li, J., Wang, H., Jin, H., Yong, J.: Current developments of k-anonymous data releasing. Electron. J. Health Inform. 3(1), 6 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, H., Cao, J., Zhang, Y.: A flexible payment scheme and its role-based access control. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 17(3), 425–436 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang, H., Sun, L.: Trust-involved access control in collaborative open social networks. In: 2010 4th International Conference on Network and System Security (NSS), pp. 239–246. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schrading, N., Alm, C.O., Ptucha, R., Homan, C.: # WhyiStayed, # WhyiLeft: microblogging to make sense of domestic abuse. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1281–1286. Human Language Technologies (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Amrit, C., Paauw, T., Aly, R., Lavric, M.: Identifying child abuse through text mining and machine learning. Expert Syst. Appl. 88, 402–418 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Andalibi, N., Haimson, O.L., De Choudhury, M., Forte, A.: Understanding social media disclosures of sexual abuse through the lenses of support seeking and anonymity. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3906–3918. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nguyen, T., Phung, D., Dao, B., Venkatesh, S., Berk, M.: Affective and content analysis of online depression communities. IEEE Trans. Affect. Comput. 5(3), 217–226 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pennebaker, J.W., Boyd, R.L., Jordan, K., Blackburn, K.: The development and psychometric properties of liwc2015. Technical report (2015)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Markham, A.: Fabrication as ethical practice: qualitative inquiry in ambiguous internet contexts. Inf. Commun. Soc. 15(3), 334–353 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cortes, C., Vapnik, V.: Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20(3), 273–297 (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Quinlan, J.R.: Induction of decision trees. Mach. Learn. 1(1), 81–106 (1986)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Han, E.-H.S., Karypis, G., Kumar, V.: Text categorization using weight adjusted k-nearest neighbor classification. In: Cheung, D., Williams, G.J., Li, Q. (eds.) PAKDD 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2035, pp. 53–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sudha Subramani
    • 1
  • Hua Wang
    • 1
  • Md Rafiqul Islam
    • 1
  • Anwaar Ulhaq
    • 1
  • Manjula O’Connor
    • 2
  1. 1.College of Engineering and ScienceVictoria UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Department of PsychiatryThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations