ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643 Volume 10, Issue 1, December 2021 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE 203 ANALYZING 'HATE SPEECH PHENOMENON' RESEARCH IN INDONESIA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Yelly Andriani Barlian School of Creative Industries, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia Email: yellybarlian@telkomuniversity.ac.id Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto School of Applied Science, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia Email: pikirwisnu@telkomuniversity.ac.id APA Citation: Barlian, Y.A., & Wijayanto, P.W. (2021). Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review. English Review: Journal of English Education, 10(1), pp. 203-212. doi: https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v10i1.5371 Received: 28-08-2021 Accepted: 21-10-2021 Published: 31-12-2021 INTRODUCTION The current technology has brought human beings to a more developed civilization. Almost all the working procedures and tasks run more accessible and faster, not to mention its limitless border. Distance is no longer a severe problem in communication since social media takes its place to alter one's existence. The positive impacts occur in varied life aspects. In the Economy aspect, technology assists the traders to market their products online. They do not have to own stores or places; however, they can spread their products widely. In the education aspect, technology contributes much in bridging difficulties, particularly in the chaotic condition lately (COVID 19 pandemic), the students gain knowledge with long-distance learning, and the sources are millions apart from learning materials uploaded by the teachers. Furthermore, there are still more benefits in other life aspects by technology. Technology significantly plays a vital role in communication needs. It creates new and modern media and their characteristics. Starting from the oldest social media such as Bulletin Board System (BBS) that announced meetings and shared information in 1978, then Friendster in 2002 as a growing social network that connected people worldwide virtually. The latest social media is Instagram, created in 2010 by Kevin Systrom dan Mike Krieger (Sartika, 2019), and it has defeated Facebook's popularity. These platforms can represent real-life in cyberplace. Dialogic (two-way) communication is efficiently conducted with social media. As a result, they are the potential to expand human social interaction. However, undoubtedly, they also cause negative impacts on communication issues. One of them is the hate speech phenomenon. According to Myers in Rahma and Andreas (2020), this communication issue is aggression, defined as physical or verbal actions that hurt others. Hate speech is one of the insulting verbal actions. In Indonesia, hate speech is delivered in varied forms, such as words, phrases, clauses, and sentences (Syafyahya, 2018). The forms of hate speech could be blasphemy, defamation, unpleasant conduct, provoking or inciting, and spreading false news (Handayani, 2019). Research conducted by the Centre for Innovation Policy and Governance (CIPG) in 2017 revealed that the hate speech phenomenon in Indonesia has emerged since 2012 with political issues in Jokowi- Ahok, Jakarta local election (Pilkada Jakarta). It Abstract: This study aims to analyze some hate speech phenomenon reviews in Indonesia. It compares how these two reviews are carried out to indicate how each source contributes and integrates the topic. The research uses a qualitative method with a systematic review. They were analyzed using a literature review matrix with the abstract data, such as author, years published, topic, and effects and findings. The PRISMA checklist (reporting guide for systematic review) is also applied to validate the observed systemic review. The research findings demonstrate that the clarity and transparency of the observed literature reviews need to be improved. Keywords: hate speech; PRISMA checklist; systematic literature review. Yelly Andriani Barlian & Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review 204 was started with the shifting role of buzzer from promoting products to campaigning specific political figures. It shows that buzzer reputation has shifted to negative (Camil et al., 2017). For instance, we often observe social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Whatsapp, the latest name-callings 'Kadrun,' short for Kadal Gurun (dabb lizard), referring to Jokowo critics and Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan supporters. Meanwhile, derogatory terms Cebong (tadpoles) is associated with Jokowi devotees (Heriyanto, 2019). Social media has been dominated by a rude sarcasm language style that contains swearing, satire, ridicule, and insulting (Jamilah, 2020). Furthermore, CIPG found that buzzers, mostly influencers, have a significant role in persuading and managing their followers to support their opinions driven by voluntary or commercial motives. At this level, most of them will not concern communication ethics. Indonesians have frequently degraded noble values because of this modern technology and postmodern paradigm that only prioritizes human rationality and objective clarity. This view belongs to deconstructionists (poststructuralists). They are famous for "a text meaning depends on the point of view of each interpreter. Then the meaning is also different and varied". For example, if the phrase "setan Kau" (you are evil) is spoken to other people, and they both understand the expression as a regular thing, it should not be interpreted as an insult. In contrast, the act is subjective to the victim when the person who hears that expression feels humiliated (Nasution, 2019). This different interpretation often causes conflict. Meanwhile, the other research stated that those who commit hate speech develop insufficient linguistic intelligence and communication ethics (Syafyahya, 2018; Nasution, 2019). The negative, unpleasant impact is still increasing today, and unfortunately, it tends to create and endanger national conflict. These two parties keep opposing each other using hate speech almost in all social issues in politics. Public figures, such as celebrities, often face situations once what they write on social media contradicts local society values. It was found in Young Lex's case when he revealed his present wife was pregnant before marriage (Latifah, 2019). However, sometimes hate speech is given without specific reason, for instance, taboo words given to Aurel Hermansyah, the daughter of Indonesian singer Anang Hermansyah (Suryani, 2021). It is also known that cyberbullying has been contributed to mental health and suicidal number (Popoola et al., 2020). Many researchers have investigated hate speech from varied perspectives to counter this possible national conflict, such as language features, hate speech reasons, or its solution. Some researchers mainly investigate hate speech from its grammatical units and their meaning using Forensic Linguistics. Subyantoro in Suryani (2021) stated that Forensic Linguistics is a multidisciplinary study, namely linguistics and forensic science. Particularly, Danielewicz-Betz in Hazhar (2021) explained that Forensic linguistics assesses and observes the language in the aspects of “crime, judicial procedures or disputes in law.” Nowadays, forensic linguistics is used in court to observe hate speech as provoking, inciting, insulting, blasphemy, defamation, and spreading the hoax. Each charge will bring the offender to jail, for example, in Ahmad Dani's case, as he provokes people to oppose the regime in power (Permatasari & Sunyantoro, 2020). These aspects are urgently required to be investigated; thus, we can formulate some proper solutions to counter this hate-speech phenomenon. Before that, specific hypotheses, new theories should be investigated from previous related research. The research investigating what and how it happens (grounded theory) is a systematic literature review. In this case, the research type investigates secondary data of the hate speech phenomenon. In other words, it observes research conducted by others. The previous research has explained how to conduct this systematic literature review in the field of tropical medicine and health (Tawfik et al., 2019). Before that, the same research field was also conducted to evaluate the quality of the systematic review (Vu-Ngoc et al., 2018). One of the tools used to evaluate systematic review quality is the PRISMA statement, and a guideline has been conducted by Page M.J (2021). However, we hardly find the study that compares the literature review analysis by using reporting guide for systematic review (PRISMA checklist). The research findings will show how these research types are conducted. This is needed as the research phases should be done appropriately to validate the clarity and transparency of the ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643 Volume 10, Issue 1, December 2021 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE 205 systemic literature review. An error in one of the phases, such as in searching strategies, will negatively affect information retrieval (Salvador- Oliván, J., 2019). These failure terms were synthesized and clarified in research studies published between 1970 and mid- 2018 (Simpson, 2020). However, some methodological solutions were carried out to diminish the difficulties (Haddaway et al., 2020). In this study, two qualitative systematic literature reviews were taken randomly to compare how these two reviews were carried out and indicate how each source contributes and integrates to the topic. Furthermore, from the research findings, It is expected that some pedagogical research will be conducted to minimize and solve this hate speech phenomenon later on. METHOD This research uses a qualitative method with systemic literature review or systematic qualitative review. Along with Davis in Snyder (2019), this method is most widely used, particularly in medical science, as it is considered transparent, systematic, and reproducible. The systematic qualitative review is also called 'meta-synthesis that integrates the data to gain new detailed concepts and theories (Lachal et al., 2017). This systematic review can analyze and identify empirical evidence to respond to the research questions or hypotheses. To validate the research questions, initially, it can be done by testing the research titles. PICOS (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study Design) is mainly used in a systematic literature review. However, they are hard to accommodate the qualitative systematic literature review. Therefore, another tool developed by Cooke et al., 2012 known as SPIDER stands for Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type. They are usually used as research instruments (Flemming & Noyes, 2021). 'Sample' size in qualitative research is smaller, but they are more detailed if it is compared to quantitative research. 'Phenomenon of Interest' triggers the researchers to discover why the phenomenon happens and why it happens. 'Design' research of these research papers is reflected in the abstracts. In a qualitative systematic literature review, the qualitative method should be revealed to guarantee the quality of the analysis. 'Evaluation' is the outcomes measure. It could be different from quantitative research that usually consists of statistics. The measurement could be unobservable and subjective. The last one is 'Research type,' which is qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method. This research is qualitative. The construction of the SPIDER tool is explained in table 1 below. Table 1. The construction of the SPIDER tool SPIDER JUSTIFICATION S More minor participants tend to be used in qualitative research than quantitative research, so this term was deemed more appropriate. Pi Qualitative research aims at understanding the how and why certain performances, judgments, and personal experiences. Therefore, its intervention/exposure is not always marked in qualitative research questions. D Qualitative research uses a theoretical framework to determine which research method to use. Inference statistics are not used in qualitative research, so the details of the research plan will help you make decisions about the robustness of your research and analysis. In addition, this may increase awareness of qualitative research in databases where titles and summaries are not structured. E Qualitative research measures the same results as quantitative research methods, that is, results. These vary depending on the survey question and may contain more unobservable and subjective composition than quantitative surveys (e.g., attitudes and views and so forth), so evaluation was deemed more suitable. R Three types of surveys can be searched: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method Source: Flemming & Noyes (taken from Cooke et al., 2012) This research is conducted to analyze some hate speech phenomenon reviews in Indonesia. It compares how these two reviews are carried out to indicate how each source contributes and integrates the topic. Once, the research uses secondary data, taking other literature as the research materials, it is Yelly Andriani Barlian & Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review 206 a systematic qualitative review. The approach is shown in table 1 below. Table 2. Approach to systematic literature reviews Approach Systematic Typical purpose Synthesize and compare evidence Research questions Specific Search Strategy Systematic Sample Characteristics Quantitative articles Analysis and Evaluation Quatitative Example of Contribution Evidence of Effect Inform policy and practice Source: Snyder, H. (2019) Additionally, Snyder concludes there are four steps in conducting this systematic qualitative method, such as 1) Designing, 2) Conducting, 3) Analysing, and 4) Writing up the reviews. In designing the review, the first question is the significance of the evaluation and which method is most appropriate for the research topic and its contribution. A qualitative systemic review is chosen as this research analyzes the hate speech phenomenon review in Indonesia. After deciding on the research questions, the research strategy can be started by searching related studies. These studies were taken from secondary data, namely journal articles, thesis, proceedings, and online magazines. There are 2 Indonesian- language articles taken from a varied database and available in Google Scholar, Researchgate, and DOAJ.org. In gaining reliable synthesis on this research topic, a literature review matrix was made with the data abstracted, such as the author, years published, topic, and the effects and findings (Snyder, 2019). The second phase is conducting the review. Both researchers chose the secondary data To guarantee quality and reliability. Snyder proposes some strategies, such as reading all the selected research papers and reading some parts (the methodology and findings). The last option is reading the abstract, selecting, and then rereading the full text before deciding. In this study, the researchers chose the second method, reading the methodology and findings as time-consuming. After conducting the review and choosing the research materials, the researchers analyzed them using the most appropriate approach for the research purposes. As this research analyzes the hate speech phenomenon review in Indonesia, the approach used is a systematic qualitative review. The last phase of conducting this systematic review is writing up the review. The appropriate reporting guide for a systematic review is PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) which is a revision of the QUOROM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-Analysis) Statement. PRISMA was developed by 29 review authors, methodologies, clinicians, medical editors, and a customer (Selçuk, 2019). It consists of 27 checklists for giving a transparent report of this systematic review. Table 3. 27-item reporting guides of PRISMA Section/topic Item Checklist items TITLE Title 1 Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. ABSTRACT Structured summary 2 If necessary, provide a structured summary that includes: Goals; Data Sources; Qualification Criteria, Participants and Interventions; Study Evaluation, and Synthesis Methods. Results; Limitations; Conclusions and implications of important findings; Systematic review registration numbers. INTRODUCTION Rationale 3 Please explain the reason for the review about what is already known. Objectives 4 Ask clear questions about participants, interventions, comparisons, results, and study design (PICOS). METHODS ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643 Volume 10, Issue 1, December 2021 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE 207 Protocol and registration 5 If possible, provide registration information, including the registration number, confirmation logs, availability, access locations (such as web addresses). Eligibility criteria 6 Specify and justify the characteristics of the study used as admission criteria (e.g., PICOS, duration of follow-up) and reporting factors (e.g., years considered, language, publication status). Information sources 7 Describe all sources at the search date and the last search (e.g., a database containing the acquired data, contact the study author to identify additional studies). Search 8 Presents a complete electronic search strategy for at least one database, including the limits used, to be repeated. Study selection 9 Demonstrates the process of study selection (i.e., screening, eligibility, inclusion in systematic reviews, and inclusion in the meta-analysis, if applicable). Data collection process 10 Describes one way to extract data from a report (for example, individual and duplicate pilot forms) and the process for retrieving and validating data from investigators. Data items 11 List and define all the variables for which the data was sought (PICOS, funding sources, etc.), as well as assumptions and simplifications. Risk of bias in individual studies 12 Describes how to assess the risk of bias in an individual study (including whether this was done at the study level or the results level) and how this information is used in each data synthesis. Summary measures 13 Enter the most important summary indicators (risk ratio, mean difference, etc.). Synthesis of results 14 Describes how to process data and combine research results, including a measure of consistency for each meta-analysis (e.g., I2). Risk of bias across studies 15 Describe all risk assessments of bias that may affect cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective reporting within the study). Additional analyses 16 Explain any additional analysis methods (sensitivity or subgroup analysis, meta- regression, etc.) and provide predefined methods. RESULTS Study selection 17 Include the number of studies included in surveys, ratings, and reviews, ideally with a flow chart, along with reasons to exclude them at each stage. Study characteristics 18 For each study, provide the characteristics from which the data were extracted (study size, PICOS, follow-up period, etc.) and provide citations. Risk of bias within studies 19 Includes data on the risk of bias in each study and, where possible, provides an assessment at the outcome level (see point 12). Results of individual studies 20 Available in each study at all endpoints (benefit or harm) considered: (a) simple summary data for each intervention group (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally forest diagrams. Synthesis of results 21 Presents the results of each meta-analysis performed, including confidence intervals and consistency measures. Risk of bias across studies 22 Presents the results of assessing the risk of bias throughout the study (see point 15). Additional analysis 23 When complete, state the results of further analysis (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analysis, meta-regression [see point 16). DISCUSSION Summary of evidence 24 For each primary endpoint, summarize the key findings, including the strength of the evidence. Take into account relevance to essential groups (health providers, users, policymakers, etc.). Limitations 25 Discuss limitations at the study and outcome level (risk of bias, etc.) and review level (incomplete search of identified study outcomes, error reporting, etc.). Conclusions 26 Provides a general interpretation of the results concerning other evidence and its impact on future studies. FUNDING Funding 27 Describe funding sources for systematic reviews and other support (providing data). The role of the funder in systematic reviews. Source: Nawijn., et al. (2019) Yelly Andriani Barlian & Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review 208 Only items 1 and 2 will be revealed in the two chosen research papers in the research implementation. They are the title and the structured summary (context, objectives, data sources, study selection, and data synthesis. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Two articles were reviewed for the second time to eliminate unfit for the selection criteria. A literature review matrix was made to synthesize this research topic with the data abstracted (Muniarti et al. 2018), such as the author, years published, topic, and the effects and findings (Snyder, 2019). Table 4. Literature review matrix No Author Year published Topic Method Effect and Findings Conclusion Suggested Solution 1. Irawan 2018 Hate Speech in Indonesia: Bahaya & Solusi Literature Review, but it is not mentioned explicitly, research method: Critical Race Theory & Islamic Perspective. 1) Hate speech in Indonesia: verbal & non-verbal 2) Hate speech causes social division, rudeness, and national decline 3) Hate speech does not reflect the respected Indonesian characteristics or nationalist values 4) Hate speech causes violence and intolerance between religions, ethnic groups, races, and groups. Government, religious leaders, and society should solve the hate speech phenomenon. 2. Hanna Rahmi, Andreas Corsini 2020 Overview of the Phenomenon of "Hate Speech" with Political Content in Indonesia in the Perspective of "Psychological Hatred" Systematic Literature review, and using secondary data, psychological studies. The emergence of hate speech: 1)Political events, such as in Indonesia president election (2014-2019) between Jokowi and Prabowo 2)Jakarta (Local) public election in 2017 between Anies Baswedan and Ahok 3) The social gap 1) Moral and religious education at school and home 2) Parents and teachers roles 3) Tolerance education 4) Multiculturalism They were taken and analyzed using a literature review matrix and PRISMA statements to answer the research questions. These articles are written in the Indonesian language with the same topic, the hate speech phenomenon in Indonesia. For instance, from most research papers, these articles, we realize that this cyber harassment can be found almost in all media, printed and online. The PRISMA statements were made to give a clear and transparent report systemic literature review. In this case, the research will take Snyder's strategy in reading some parts of the research paper (the methodology and findings). The PRISMA checklist Item 1: Title & abstract ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643 Volume 10, Issue 1, December 2021 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE 209 Title research 1: 'Hate Speech in Indonesia: Bahaya & Solusi' Title research 2: Overview of the phenomenon of "Hate Speech" with political content in Indonesia in the perspective of "Psychological Hatred" Item 1 identifies the report as a systematic review, meta-synthesis, or both. The title is observed with the SPIDER tool. Explanation: The title of the first research should be more informative to help the readers and the search engine. SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type) approach can be used to make titles. Research' Sample' is defined as a smaller group from a certain population. It could be a group of people, objects, or items (Bhardwaj, 2019). The titles of the two research papers refer to a sample of hate speech items in Indonesian, which are available in varied media. They are a smaller group from the population. 'The Phenomenon of Interest' is reflected in the first titles (Bahaya & Solusi or Hazard & Solution in English), and in the second title refers to a political issue. The 'Design' research of these two research papers is not described in their research titles. They are mentioned insufficiently in abstracts. The 'Evaluation' only appears in the title of the second research that uses the psychological hatred perspective to discuss its research data. As the systematic literature review, both titles should reflect it by adding the phrase 'systematic review,' 'meta-analysis,' or 'meta-synthesis as the 'Research type.' Item 2: Structured summary Provides a structured summary and includes background information as needed. Goals; Data Sources; Qualification Criteria, Participants and Interventions; Study Evaluation and Synthesis Methods. Results; Limitations; Conclusions and implications of essential findings; Funding for systematic reviews. Systematic review registration number. This step significantly improves the writing quality as it guides the writer to jot the information down in detail and is well organized. It is also known as the ‘initial impression’ (Tullu, 2019). Report-research 1: 'Hate Speech in Indonesia: Bahaya & Solusi' Context: Hate speech in social media (mainly) is categorized in many forms, and it can endanger Indonesia's 'unity of diversity' value. Objective: The research aims to capture the hate speech phenomenon in Indonesia and its solution. Data sources: This research uses the Critical Race Theory perspective from Delgado & Jean Stefancic (Harris, 2001), Islamic perspective on hate speech, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, KUHP (Book of Criminal Law), and some additional online services. Study selection: This research focuses on the Critical Race Theory perspective from Delgado & Jean Stefancic (Harris, 2001), Islamic perspective on hate speech Data synthesis: Hate speech can be categorized into verbal and non-verbal disturbing actions. This research observed the hate speech phenomenon in Indonesia, particularly digital social media. Due to its adverse effects, the Indonesian government has committed to oppose it by instructing all the social media to confirm the 'regime of censorship' and delete all the hate speech contents, besides the cyber policy implementation. This first research suggests the Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Islamic perspectives to offer the solution. It explains that CRT can learn and transform the relationship among races, racism, and power. Moreover, political subjectivity will degrade the objectivity of social and human welfare implementation. Based on the CRT perspective, hate speech can cause physical and psychological disorders. Thus, the CRT perspective needs to provide social media users with techniques, guidance, and counseling. Another perspective suggested by the researcher is applying the Islamic perspective. Principally, there is no prohibition of free speech as long as the verbal or non-verbal actions are not contrary to Islamic values and against others' freedom and dignity. Furthermore, the researcher also demonstrates the 'shura' concept in Islam. It is noted that 'shura' is such a discussion forum where people can have different opinions to find the best solutions (Nusa, 2018). Conclusion: According to the CRT perspective, the hate speech phenomenon should be prevented due to its adverse impacts on individuals and nations. The researcher proposes the concept of 'shura' to improve people's communication issues. Yelly Andriani Barlian & Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review 210 The researchers also urge active participation from the government, religious leaders, and society. Report-research 2: Overview of the phenomenon of "Hate Speech" with political content in Indonesia in the perspective of "Psychological Hatred" Context: The phenomenon of political hate speech in Indonesia Ojective: This second research observed the emergence of hate speech to discover the reasons, especially in pedagogy. Data sources: This research uses Systemic literature Review, Electronic Information and Transaction (Indonesian: ITE Law), "Duplex Theory of Hatred," Semiotics, Social and contains control theory, Bio sociological theory, cognitive perspective. Study selection: systemic literature review, Duplex theory of hatred, perspective cognitive. Data synthesis: The negative impacts of social media are fraud, hoax, cyberbullying, and hate speech intensely in a political context. Hate speech is known as aggression, precisely non-physical or verbal aggression. This phenomenon is increasing because hate speech characteristics are 1) permanent, 2) itinerancy, 3) anonymity, and 4) transnationality (Anis, 2017). Besides encouraging all social media to delete hate speech contents, the Indonesian government authorizes the ITE Law and cybercrime determination to overcome this issue. The researcher exposes "Duplex Theory of Hatred" to relate hate speech to a psychological perspective: (1) Hate is psychologically related to love. (2) Hate is not the opposite of love, nor is it the absence of love. The relationship between these is quite complex. (3) Hate, like love, is a story related to emotional character. (4) Hatred, like love, can be explained using a triangulation structure based on individual stories, and the components of that structure exist negation of intimacy, passion, and commitment. (5) Hate is the main component that gives rise to violence large (e.g., terrorism and genocide) (Sternberg, 2003). Conclusion: Due to the negative impacts of the hate speech phenomenon, some solutions should be provided. It should be supported by all aspects, especially in the education aspect. Teachers, principals, and parents are obliged to educate young generations to be tolerant regardless of different issues. From the results, the two research should be more informative both in title and abstract. The report noted that research title (1) only exposes the Sample and the Phenomenon of Interest. In contrast, the title of research (2) only exposes the Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, and Evaluation. A good title in a systematic literature review should reflect the research Sample, the Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and the Research type. Some elements should be available in a research abstract. They are the 1) Objective, aim, the research purpose, 2) Research method, 3) Result of significant findings, and 4) Principle conclusion (Regoniel, 2021). The second research explores the topic phenomena more and a concise research objective in the last sentence of the abstract. It should have revealed the research method as well. Meanwhile, the first abstract is complete. Besides explaining its research method, it also contains the research conclusion. The structured research summary of these two research sufficiently covers all the research questions. CONCLUSION From this research, we can conclude that writing a systematic literature review is challenging. To conduct an excellent systematic literature review, we can use the PRISMA checklist statements to guide us in composing the research and the SPIDER tool as an instrument to decide the systematic literature review titles. Furthermore, a more complete and detailed observation of related topics will be conducted, particularly in pedagogical aspects, such as academic writing issues. REFERENCES Anis, M., Anggreni, L. and Yuliarti, M. (2017). Hate speech in Arabic newspaper cyber law - case study in Al-Jazeera.Net Daily Newspaper. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Sociology Education (ICSE 2017), 1, pages 615-620. ISBN: 978-989-758-316-2 Bhardwaj P. (2019). Types of sampling in research. J Pract Cardiovasc Sci, 5, pp. 157-163. Camil, Rinaldi., Natasha H. A., Klara Esti (2017). Di Balik Fenomena Buzzer: Memahami Lanskap Industri dan Pengaruh Bazzer di Indonesia. Center for Innovation Policy Governance (CIPG). Flemming, Kate., Noyes, Jane (2021) What is qualitative evidence synthesis?: Methodologies and methods for qualitative evidence synthesis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. ISSN 16094069 ENGLISH REVIEW: Journal of English Education p-ISSN 2301-7554, e-ISSN 2541-3643 Volume 10, Issue 1, December 2021 https://journal.uniku.ac.id/index.php/ERJEE 211 (In Press) Haddaway, N. R., Bethel, A., Dicks, L. V., Koricheva, J., Macura, B., Petrokofsky, G., Pullin, A. S., Savilaakso, S., & Stewart, G. B. (2020). Eight problems with literature reviews and how to fix them. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4(12), 1582– 1589. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01295- x Hazhar, Ahmed. (2021). The role of forensic linguistics in crime investigation: Uses in legal proceedings. 10.5281/zenodo.4609333. Heriyanto, Devina. (2019). "The rise of 'kadrun' and 'Togog': Why political polarization in Indonesia is far from over." Retrieved https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/11/19/ the-rise-of-kadrun-and-togog-why-political- polarization-in-indonesia-is-far-from-over.html. Irawan, I. (2018). Hate speech di Indonesia: Bahaya dan Solusi. Mawa’izh: Jurnal Dakwah Dan Pengembangan Sosial Kemanusiaan, 9(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.32923/maw.v9i1.712 Jamilah, F., & Wahyuni, P. (2020). Ujaran kebencian dalam kolom komentar YouTube pada tahun politik pemilihan presiden 2019. Silampari Bisa: Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Bahasa Indonesia, Daerah, Dan Asing, 3(2), 325-341. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31540/silamparib isa.v3i2.1109 PMCID: PMC5716974 Lachal., Jonathan., Revah-Levy, A., Orri, M. (2017) Marie Rose Moro Front Psychiatry, 8, 269. Published online 2017 Dec 1. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00269 Latifah. (2019). Analisis ujaran kebencian terhadap postingan klarifikasi di akun youtube young lex. Seminar Internasional Riksa Bahasa XIII, e- ISSN: 2655-1780 p-ISSN: 2654-8534. http://proceedings.upi.edu/index.php/riksabahasa Murniarti, E., Nainggolan, B., Panjaitan, H., Pandiangan, L.Elly, Widyani, I. D., Dakhi S. (2018). Writing matrix and assessing literature review: A Methodological element of a scientific project. Journal of Asian Development, 4(2). ISSN 2377- 9594 Nasution, Erika H. (2019). Analisis ujaran kebencian bahasa di media sosial. Skripsi. Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan Universitas Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara, Medan. Nawijn, F., Wietske H. W. Ham, Roderick M. Houwert, Rolf H. H. Groenwold., Falco Hietbrink, Diederik P. J. Smeeing. (2019). Quality of reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in emergency medicine based on the PRISMA statement. BMC Emergency Medicine, 19(19). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-019-0233-6 Nusa, Ranny A. (2018). Prinsip Syura sebagai demokrasi Islam: Study terhadap pemikiran Syekh Muhammad Abduh. Fakultas Ilmu Agama Islam, Universitas Islam Indonesia Yogyakarta. Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M. et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev 10, 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021- 01626-4 Permatasari, D. Indah, Subyantoro. (2020). Ujaran kebencian Facebook tahun 2017-2019. Jurnal Sastra Indonesia, 9(1), 62-70. https://doi.org/10.15294/jsi.v9i1.33020 Popoola, Olalekan, O. Olagundoye, M. Alugo. (2020). Social media and suicide, anxiety disorders - the new achievements, Vladimir V. Kalinin, Cicek Hocaoglu and Shafizan Mohamed, IntechOpen, DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.92160. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/71917 Rahmi, Hanna., Andreas Corsini (2020). Tinjauan fenomena “Hate Speech” dengan muatan politik di Indonesia dalam perspektif “Psychological Hatred”. Jurnal Keamanan Nasional, 6(2), 285- 303. https://doi.org/10.31599/jkn.v6i2.461 Regoniel, P. (2021). How to write a good abstract: Four essential elements with example [Blog Post]. In Research-based Articles. Retrieved from https://simplyeducate.me/2021/11/09/a-good- abstract/ Salvador-Oliván, J., Marco-Cuenca, G., & Arquero- Avilés, R. (2019). Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 107(2), 210–221. doi:https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2019.567 Sartika, Resa Eka Ayu. (2019). This article was published in Kompas with the title “Penemuan yang Mengubah Dunia: Media Sosial, Kenapa Bikin Panik saat Diblokir?” Retrived https://sains.kompas.com/read/2019/05/23/220400 623/penemuan-yang-mengubah-dunia--media- sosial-kenapa-bikin-panik-saat-diblokir-?page=all (28 Juli 2021) Selçuk A. A. (2019). A Guide for systematic reviews: PRISMA. Turkish archives of otorhinolaryngology, 57(1), 57–58. https://doi.org/10.5152/tao.2019.4058 Simpson A., Maltese A.V., Anderson A., Sung E. (2020) Failures, Errors, and Mistakes: A Systematic Review of the Literature. In: Vanderheiden E., Mayer CH. (eds) Mistakes, Errors, and Failures across Cultures. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35574-6_18 Snyder.H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104(C), 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039 Suryani, Yunita., Rika I., Siti Umi H. (2021). Linguistik https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/11/19/the-rise-of-kadrun-and-togog-why-political-polarization-in-indonesia-is-far-from-over.html https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/11/19/the-rise-of-kadrun-and-togog-why-political-polarization-in-indonesia-is-far-from-over.html https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2019/11/19/the-rise-of-kadrun-and-togog-why-political-polarization-in-indonesia-is-far-from-over.html https://doi.org/10.32923/maw.v9i1.712 https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.31540/silamparibisa.v3i2.1109 https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.31540/silamparibisa.v3i2.1109 http://proceedings.upi.edu/index.php/riksabahasa https://doi.org/10.15294/jsi.v9i1.33020 https://doi.org/10.31599/jkn.v6i2.461 Yelly Andriani Barlian & Pikir Wisnu Wijayanto Analyzing 'Hate Speech Phenomenon' research in Indonesia: A systematic review 212 forensik ujaran kebencian terhadap Artis Aurel Hermansyah di media sosial instagra. Belajar Bahasa Jurnal Ilmiah Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa dan sastra Indonesia, 6(1), 107-118. https://doi.org/10.32528/bb.v6i1.4167 Syafyahya, Leni. (2018). Ujaran kebencian dalam bahasa Indonesia kajian bentuk dan makna. Makalah Kongres KBI 2018. Fakultas Ilmu Budaya Universitas Andalas. Tawfik, G.M., Dila, K.A.S., Mohamed, M.Y.F., Tam, D., Kien, N., Ahmed, A., Huy, N. (2019) A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Trop Med Health 47, 46 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41182-019-0165-6 Tullu M. S. (2019). Writing the title and abstract for a research paper: Being concise, precise, and meticulous is the key. Saudi journal of anesthesia, 13(Suppl1), S12–S17. https://doi.org/10.4103/sja.SJA_685_18 Vu-Ngoc H, Elawady SS, Mehyar GM, Abdelhamid AH, Mattar OM, Halhouli O, Vuong N., Ali, C. D., Hasan U. H., Kien N., Hirayama, K., Huy, N. T. (2018). Quality of flow diagram in systematic review and/or meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 13(6): e0195955. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195955 https://doi.org/10.32528/bb.v6i1.4167