Political Ideology Detection

Stance detection in social media is challenging, as interpreting a text often requires understanding the author's perspective. We re-frame political stance detection as an author-informed text understanding task, where it is desired to infer both the author's political leaning and their stance towards the target from the text. We first show that human annotators struggle to infer authors' political leanings and stances from individual tweets, and that pretrained large language models (LLMs) perform below human level in this setting. We then demonstrate that author context improves stance detection for both humans and LLMs, with particularly pronounced benefits for tweets perceived as sarcastic. Through extensive experiments, we further show that LLMs can be effectively fine-tuned to predict authors' political affiliations, and that author-informed fine-tuning yields better stance detection performance than standard fine-tuning. This approach not only surpasses human performance but also improves generalization across datasets. To support further research on author-informed political stance detection, we release a large dataset of stance-labeled tweets enriched with author-context information.

Rechtsrock is a subgenre of rock music that spreads right-wing ideology, often instrumentalized to recruit adolescents into the radical scene. Monitoring institutions counteract this by manually examining and, in some cases, banning extremist content; however, there are border cases that evade regulation. We present a study aimed at determining whether such a case, the band Frei$.$Wild, should be classified as politically right-leaning or as part of the general German rock genre. We sampled a German rock dataset and created a corpus for right-wing rock to use as reference in this analysis and found that we can confirm the intuitions from previous investigations that Frei$.$Wild successfully maintains an ambiguity with regard to their political affiliation. However, the tendency is towards the right-wing spectrum. Lexical analyses reveal nationalistic narratives and two high-performing classifiers (up to 97% ROC-AUC score) label more than half of their songs as right-wing extremist. Our analysis provides insight into how computational methods can improve the process of identifying right-wing extremist tendencies in music, especially in borderline cases like Frei$.$Wild. The code and data are made available for future research.

Large Language Models are increasingly deployed as information intermediaries, yet measuring their political behavior remains fragile because questionnaire results mix model dispositions with measurement artifacts and response-elicitation biases. We introduce a robust Political Compass Test evaluation framework that samples 300 configurations across an eight-dimensional perturbation space varying language, framing, instructions, answer format, option order, and persona wording. We evaluate eight Gemma 3 and Qwen 3 models across 14 languages and three quantization levels, obtaining design-averaged political coordinates with quantified uncertainty. Most models lean Libertarian-Left on average, but instruction phrasing, language, and answer format significantly affect recovered coordinates. Cross-lingual differences primarily reflect coordinate drift rather than distinct cultural reasoning. Reverse-engineering the test also exposes axis-weighting imbalances and the collapse of degenerate responses toward the center, so near-origin estimates for the smallest models can reflect weak signal rather than centrism. Free-text reasoning and chat-then-classify elicitation alter recovered coordinates, and larger models show clearer persona separation, with a specific failure of the Authoritarian-Left persona to move most models in the intended social direction. In downstream tasks, persona effects are modest relative to model size and target group for hate-speech detection, while base and centrist prompts give the highest agreement for topic-level sentiment. Political role prompting therefore has measurable but task- and dataset-specific downstream effects.

Predictive political question answering (QA), such as predicting how a political actor will vote, goes beyond factual lookup. External political resources offer rich historical evidence, but rarely contain the answer itself. Existing LLM augmentation methods, including actor-profile-based simulation and knowledge graph evidence injection, improve political reasoning but largely treat external resources as knowledge-based evidence, leaving prediction-relevant signals under-modeled. We identify two complementary signals for predictive political QA: actor stances that capture issue-specific preferences, and high-order structure signals that capture indirect dependencies among political actors. We propose PSL, a dual-view framework that converts semi-structured political records into inference-oriented evidence for LLMs. PSL extracts stance signals from question-relevant actor records in a semantic view, and learns structure-aware actor representations from an actor interaction graph in a vector view. Across three real-world datasets and multiple LLMs, PSL consistently outperforms baselines, with ablations confirming the complementary gains of stance and structure signals.

The rapid growth of social media has greatly influenced political discourse, highlighting the need to understand individual political ideologies and their temporal dynamics. This task faces challenges such as data scarcity, abundant non-political content, costly and bias-prone manual annotation, and difficulty in modeling future ideological inclinations. To address these issues, we propose TSN4PI, a unified framework for tracking the evolution of political ideologies on social media. It includes two core modules. The PIDN uses large language models with style transfer and unsupervised domain adaptation to enable robust ideology detection and filter irrelevant content from noisy, cross-domain data. The PIPN employs temporal graph neural networks to predict future ideological shifts, enabling comprehensive analysis of ideology presence, intensity, and evolution. We release two large-scale datasets for noncommercial research use to facilitate further work. Extensive case studies on multiple platforms (X and Truth Social) validate the effectiveness of TSN4PI and provide empirical insights into political polarization and the evolution of online ideologies. Our findings offer a nuanced perspective, advancing both methodological development and empirical understanding in this field.

We ask whether topic sentiment has a causal effect on perceived political ideology, and whether the answer depends on who assigns the ideology label. Using articles from AllSides, paired with shared sentiment annotations from Llama-3.3-70b-versatile, we compare ideology labels from expert human annotators, GPT-4o-mini (baseline and finetuned), and Llama-3.3-70B. We apply Double Machine Learning (DML) and mediation analysis across all four annotation paradigms. Zero-shot LLMs regularly inflate effect sizes relative to human annotations, while fine-tuning often attenuates them back toward the human scale. Our results have implications for the use of LLM annotations as silver labels and as proxies for human judgment in downstream causal analyses: they may be reliable for recovering the presence and direction of effects on the partisan topics, but not their magnitude, leading to over- or under-prediction of some ideology given particular topics.

Elections represent a crucial milestone in a nation's ongoing development. To better understand the political rhetoric from various movements, ranging from left to right, we propose a transformer-based model capable of projecting the political orientation of a text on a continuous left-to-right spectrum, represented by a normalized scalar d between -1 and 1. This approach enables analysts to focus on specific segments of the political landscape, such as conservatives, while excluding liberal and far-right movements. Such a task can only be achieved with multiclass classifiers, provided that the desired orientation is incorporated within one of their predefined classes. To determine the most suitable foundation model among 13 candidate transformers for this task, we constructed four distinct corpora. One corpus comprised annotated plenary notes from the German Bundestag, while another was based on an official online decision-making tool, Wahl-O-Mat. The third corpus consisted of articles from 33 newspapers, each identified by its political orientation, and the fourth included 535,200 tweets from 597 members of the 20th and 21st German Bundestag. To mitigate overfitting, we used two distinct corpora for training and two for testing, respectively. For in-domain performance, DeBERTa-large achieved the highest F1 score F1=0.844 as well as for the X (Twitter) out-of-domain test ACC=0.864. Regarding the newspaper out-of-domain test, Gemma2-2B excelled (MAE = 0.172). This study demonstrates that transformer models can recognize political framing in German news at the level of public opinion polls. Our findings suggest that both the model architecture and the availability of domain-specific training data can be as influential as model size for estimating political bias. We discuss methodological limitations and outline directions for improving the robustness of bias measurement.

Understanding how people argue across ideological divides online is important for studying political polarization, misinformation, and content moderation. Existing datasets capture only part of this problem: some preserve text but ignore interaction structure, some model structure without rich semantics, and others represent conversations without stable user-level ideological identity. We introduce ControBench, a benchmark for controversial discourse analysis that combines heterogeneous social interaction graphs with rich textual semantics. Built from Reddit discussions on three topics, Trump, abortion, and religion, ControBench contains 7,370 users, 1,783 posts, and 26,525 interactions. The graph contains user and post nodes connected by semantically enriched edges; in particular, user-comment-user edges encode both a reply and the parent comment that it responds to, preserving local argumentative context. User labels are derived from self-declared Reddit flairs, providing a scalable proxy for ideological identity without manual annotation. The resulting datasets exhibit low or negative adjusted homophily (Trump: -0.77, Abortion: 0.06, Religion: 0.04), reflecting the cross-cutting structure of real-world debate. We evaluate graph neural networks, pretrained language models, and large language models on ControBench and observe distinct performance patterns across topics and model families, especially when ideological boundaries are ambiguous. These results position ControBench as a challenging and realistic benchmark for controversial discourse analysis.

Most intrinsic association probes operate at the word, sentence, or corpus level, obscuring author-level variation. We present POLAR (Per-user On-axis Lexical Association Re-port), a per-user lexical association test that runs in the embedding space of a lightly adapted masked language model. Authors are represented by private deterministic to-kens; POLAR projects these vectors onto curated lexicalaxes and reports standardized effects with permutation p-values and Benjamini--Hochberg control. On a balanced bot--human Twitter benchmark, POLAR cleanly separates LLM-driven bots from organic accounts; on an extremist forum,it quantifies strong alignment with slur lexicons and reveals rightward drift over time. The method is modular to new attribute sets and provides concise, per-author diagnostics for computational social science. All code is publicly avail-able at https://github.com/pedroaugtb/POLAR-A-Per-User-Association-Test-in-Embedding-Space.

Due to the correlational structure in our traits such as identities, cultures, and political attitudes, seemingly innocuous preferences like following a band or using a specific slang can reveal private traits. This possibility, especially when combined with massive, public social data and advanced computational methods, poses a fundamental privacy risk. As our data exposure online and the rapid advancement of AI are increasing the risk of misuse, it is critical to understand the capacity of large language models (LLMs) to exploit such potential. Here, using online discussions on DebateOrg and Reddit, we show that LLMs can reliably infer hidden political alignment, significantly outperforming traditional machine learning models. Prediction accuracy further improves as we aggregate multiple text-level inferences into a user-level prediction, and as we use more politics-adjacent domains. We demonstrate that LLMs leverage words that are highly predictive of political alignment while not being explicitly political. Our findings underscore the capacity and risks of LLMs for exploiting socio-cultural correlates.