Lune

EMNLP Findings2025

MFTCXplain: A Multilingual Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating the Moral Reasoning of LLMs through Multi-hop Hate Speech Explanation

Jackson Trager, Francielle Vargas, Diego Alves, Matteo Guida, Mikel K. Ngueajio, Ameeta Agrawal, Yalda Daryani, Farzan Karimi-Malekabadi, Flor Miriam Plaza del Arco

Abstract

Ensuring the moral reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a growing concern as these systems are used in socially sensitive tasks. Nevertheless, current evaluation benchmarks present two major shortcomings: a lack of annotations that justify moral classifications, which limits transparency and interpretability; and a predominant focus on English, which constrains the assessment of moral reasoning across diverse cultural settings. In this paper, we introduce MFTCXplain, a multilingual benchmark dataset for evaluating the moral reasoning of LLMs via multi-hop hate speech explanations using the Moral Foundations Theory. MFTCXplain 1 comprises 3,000 tweets across Portuguese, Italian, Persian, and English, annotated with binary hate speech labels, moral categories, and text span-level rationales. Our results show a misalignment between LLM outputs and human annotations in moral reasoning tasks. While LLMs perform well in hate speech detection (F1 up to 0.836), their ability to predict moral sentiments is notably weak (F1 < 0.35). Furthermore, rationale alignment remains limited mainly in underrepresented languages. Our findings show the limited capacity of current LLMs to internalize and reflect human moral reasoning 2 .

Ask Lune

Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.

Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.

Questions to start from

Lune answers from

the full paper · related work

Get the answer

Free to start. No credit card required.

Builds on6

  1. BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
  2. ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP ModelsJay DeYoung, Sarthak Jain, Nazneen Fatema Rajani, Eric P. Lehman et al.ACL 2020 · 36 citations
  3. Moral Foundations of Large Language ModelsMarwa Abdulhai, Gregory Serapio-García, Clément Crepy, Daria Valter et al.EMNLP 2024 · 22 citations
  4. MEEP: Is this Engaging? Prompting Large Language Models for Dialogue Evaluation in Multilingual SettingsAmila Ferron, Amber Shore, Ekata Mitra, Ameeta AgrawalEMNLP Findings 2023 · 9 citations
  5. EX-FEVER: A Dataset for Multi-hop Explainable Fact VerificationHuanhuan Ma, Weizhi Xu, Yifan Wei, Liuji Chen et al.ACL Findings 2024 · 8 citations

Related papers

  1. Are Rules Meant to be Broken? Understanding Multilingual Moral Reasoning as a Computational Pipeline with UniMoralShivani Kumar, David JurgensACL 2025
  2. Self-Explaining Hate Speech Detection with Moral RationalesFrancielle Vargas, Jackson Trager, Diego Alves, Matteo Guida et al.ACL Findings 2026
  3. CMoralEval: A Moral Evaluation Benchmark for Chinese Large Language ModelsLinhao Yu, Yongqi Leng, Yufei Huang, Shang Wu et al.ACL Findings 2024 · 4 citations
  4. MORALISE: A Structured Benchmark for Moral Alignment in Visual Language ModelsXiao Lin, Zhining Liu, Ze Yang, Gaotang Li et al.ICML 2026
  5. Tales of Morality: Comparing Human- and LLM-Generated Moral Stories from Visual CuesRezvaneh Rezapour, Sullam Jeoung, Zhiwen You, Jana DiesnerEMNLP Findings 2025 · 2 citations
Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines