Mental manipulation, the strategic use of language to covertly influence or exploit others, is a newly emerging task in computational social reasoning. Prior work has focused exclusively on textual conversations, overlooking how manipulative tactics manifest in speech. We present the first study of mental manipulation detection in spoken dialogues, introducing a synthetic multi-speaker benchmark SPEECHMENTALMANIP that augments a text-based dataset with high-quality, voice-consistent Text-to-Speech rendered audio. Using few-shot large audio-language models and human annotation, we evaluate how modality affects detection accuracy and perception. Our results reveal that models exhibit high specificity but markedly lower recall on speech compared to text, suggesting sensitivity to missing acoustic or prosodic cues in training. Human raters show similar uncertainty in the audio setting, underscoring the inherent ambiguity of manipulative speech. Together, these findings highlight the need for modality-aware evaluation and safety alignment in multimodal dialogue systems.

Recent work representing discourse relations such as “cause” or “concession” in the framework of eRST has connected hierarchical discourse parsing to explicit connectives, such as ’because’ or ’although’, bringing the framework closer to lexicalized shallow parsing in the tradition of PDTB. However, while PDTB postulates implicit, unexpressed connectives (i.e. an implied ’although’ etc.), no such devices are recognized in eRST, and consequently next to nothing is known about the relationship between PDTB-style implicit connectives and eRST-style discourse graphs. In this paper we propose and evaluate an algorithm to align eRST data, which already indicates explicit connectives, to implicit connective annotations following the PDTB guidelines. We also conduct the first evaluation of the relationship between hierarchical RST-style relations and PDTB implicit connectives.

Propaganda plays a critical role in shaping public opinion and fueling disinformation. While existing research primarily focuses on identifying propaganda techniques, it lacks the ability to capture the broader motives and the impacts of such content. To address these challenges, we introduce PropaInsight, a conceptual framework grounded in foundational social science research, which systematically dissects propaganda into techniques, arousal appeals, and underlying intent. PropaInsight offers a more granular understanding of how propaganda operates across different contexts. Additionally, we present PropaGaze, a novel dataset that combines human-annotated data with high-quality synthetic data generated through a meticulously designed pipeline. Our experiments show that off-the-shelf LLMs struggle with propaganda analysis, but PropaGaze significantly improves performance. Fine-tuned Llama-7B-Chat achieves 203.4% higher text span IoU in technique identification and 66.2% higher BertScore in appeal analysis compared to 1-shot GPT-4-Turbo. Moreover, PropaGaze complements limited human-annotated data in data-sparse and cross-domain scenarios, demonstrating its potential for comprehensive and generalizable propaganda analysis.

The rapid expansion of online content has intensified the issue of information redundancy, underscoring the need for solutions that can identify genuinely new information. Despite this challenge, the research community has seen a decline in focus on novelty detection, particularly with the rise of large language models (LLMs). Additionally, previous approaches have relied heavily on human annotation, which is time-consuming, costly, and particularly challenging when annotators must compare a target document against a vast number of historical documents. In this work, we introduce NovAScore (Novelty Evaluation in Atomicity Score), an automated metric for evaluating document-level novelty. NovAScore aggregates the novelty and salience scores of atomic information, providing high interpretability and a detailed analysis of a document’s novelty. With its dynamic weight adjustment scheme, NovAScore offers enhanced flexibility and an additional dimension to assess both the novelty level and the importance of information within a document. Our experiments show that NovAScore strongly correlates with human judgments of novelty, achieving a 0.626 Point-Biserial correlation on the TAP-DLND 1.0 dataset and a 0.920 Pearson correlation on an internal human-annotated dataset.