跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.07926 · v1

AraEngage: Interpretable Linguistic Correlates of Engagement in Arabic Facebook News

首次提交 2026-11-05 20:32
版本更新 2026-11-05 20:32
雷达观测 2026-11-06 11:06
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Engagement features developed for English are routinely applied to Arabic, but unvocalized Arabic changes what a lexical feature measures. We introduce AraEngage, a query-defined sample of 10,000 public Arabic Facebook news posts from 2,451 pages in 57 countries (2023-2024) that pairs engagement counts with interpretable linguistic features. We use it to examine which interpretable Arabic indicators are associated with follower-normalized engagement, and how far those associations can be trusted given publisher context, the definition of engagement, and lexical ambiguity. Religious expressions, message length, sentence length, and lexical density are the leading correlates in a Random Forest model ($R^2$ = 0.38 on a post-level split) interpreted with SHAP. Unlike English news, positive sentiment is associated with higher engagement in this Arabic news sample. Message length shows a length paradox: unadjusted raw engagement is highest for long posts, whereas the model's attributions for follower-normalized engagement favor short posts. A linguistic audit identifies why standard lexicon features are fragile in unvocalized Arabic: imperative lists contain homographs such as the form read as "express!" that is also the frequent preposition "via", hedge lists conflate the possibility marker qad + imperfect ("may") with the emphatic qad + perfect ("has indeed"), and religious lists mix devotional formulas with place names in political news. These are plausible sources of measurement error that may attenuate the near-zero associations of imperatives and hedges. All findings are observational associations with operationalized indicators. We release the derived linguistic features, engagement counts, refined lexicons, and analysis code; raw posts are not redistributed, in line with CrowdTangle terms.

作者备注:13 pages, 4 figures, 8 tables. To appear in ArabicNLP 2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-05 20:32 · 最新观测版本

AraEngage: Interpretable Linguistic Correlates of Engagement in Arabic Facebook News

Engagement features developed for English are routinely applied to Arabic, but unvocalized Arabic changes what a lexical feature measures. We introduce AraEngage, a query-defined sample of 10,000 public Arabic Facebook news posts from 2,451 pages in 57 countries (2023-2024) that pairs engagement counts with interpretable linguistic features. We use it to examine which interpretable Arabic indicators are associated with follower-normalized engagement, and how far those associations can be trusted given publisher context, the definition of engagement, and lexical ambiguity. Religious expressions, message length, sentence length, and lexical density are the leading correlates in a Random Forest model ($R^2$ = 0.38 on a post-level split) interpreted with SHAP. Unlike English news, positive sentiment is associated with higher engagement in this Arabic news sample. Message length shows a length paradox: unadjusted raw engagement is highest for long posts, whereas the model's attributions for follower-normalized engagement favor short posts. A linguistic audit identifies why standard lexicon features are fragile in unvocalized Arabic: imperative lists contain homographs such as the form read as "express!" that is also the frequent preposition "via", hedge lists conflate the possibility marker qad + imperfect ("may") with the emphatic qad + perfect ("has indeed"), and religious lists mix devotional formulas with place names in political news. These are plausible sources of measurement error that may attenuate the near-zero associations of imperatives and hedges. All findings are observational associations with operationalized indicators. We release the derived linguistic features, engagement counts, refined lexicons, and analysis code; raw posts are not redistributed, in line with CrowdTangle terms.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗