Explaining Search Result Stances to Opinionated People
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.08460v1
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2023 15:08:24 GMT
- Title: Explaining Search Result Stances to Opinionated People
- Authors: Z. Wu, T. Draws, F. Cau, F. Barile, A. Rieger, N. Tintarev
- Abstract summary: We investigate whether stance labels and their explanations can help users consume more diverse search results.
We find that stance labels and explanations lead to a more diverse search result consumption.
However, we do not find evidence for systematic opinion change among users in this context.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: People use web search engines to find information before forming opinions,
which can lead to practical decisions with different levels of impact. The
cognitive effort of search can leave opinionated users vulnerable to cognitive
biases, e.g., the confirmation bias. In this paper, we investigate whether
stance labels and their explanations can help users consume more diverse search
results. We automatically classify and label search results on three topics
(i.e., intellectual property rights, school uniforms, and atheism) as against,
neutral, and in favor, and generate explanations for these labels. In a user
study (N =203), we then investigate whether search result stance bias (balanced
vs biased) and the level of explanation (plain text, label only, label and
explanation) influence the diversity of search results clicked. We find that
stance labels and explanations lead to a more diverse search result
consumption. However, we do not find evidence for systematic opinion change
among users in this context. We believe these results can help designers of
search engines to make more informed design decisions.
Related papers
- Navigating the Thin Line: Examining User Behavior in Search to Detect
Engagement and Backfire Effects [0.0]
We investigate whether different levels of bias metrics and search results presentation can affect the stance diversity consumption and search behavior of opinionated users.
Our results show that exposing participants to (counter-attitudinally) biased search results increases their consumption of attitude-opposing content.
We also found that bias was associated with a trend toward overall fewer interactions within the search page.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-20T10:28:25Z) - Algorithmic amplification of biases on Google Search [0.6167267484484484]
This paper investigates how individuals' preexisting attitudes influence the modern information-seeking process.
Individuals with opposing attitudes on abortion receive different search results.
Google Search engine reinforces preexisting beliefs in search results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-17T08:24:57Z) - Examining bias perpetuation in academic search engines: an algorithm
audit of Google and Semantic Scholar [0.0]
This study examines whether confirmation-biased queries prompted into Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar will yield skewed results.
Technology-related queries displaying more significant disparities.
Academic search results that perpetuate confirmation bias have strong implications for both researchers and citizens searching for evidence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T15:43:31Z) - User Attitudes to Content Moderation in Web Search [49.1574468325115]
We examine the levels of support for different moderation practices applied to potentially misleading and/or potentially offensive content in web search.
We find that the most supported practice is informing users about potentially misleading or offensive content, and the least supported one is the complete removal of search results.
More conservative users and users with lower levels of trust in web search results are more likely to be against content moderation in web search.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-05T10:57:15Z) - Unveiling the Hidden Agenda: Biases in News Reporting and Consumption [59.55900146668931]
We build a six-year dataset on the Italian vaccine debate and adopt a Bayesian latent space model to identify narrative and selection biases.
We found a nonlinear relationship between biases and engagement, with higher engagement for extreme positions.
Analysis of news consumption on Twitter reveals common audiences among news outlets with similar ideological positions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-14T18:58:42Z) - Annotators with Attitudes: How Annotator Beliefs And Identities Bias
Toxic Language Detection [75.54119209776894]
We investigate the effect of annotator identities (who) and beliefs (why) on toxic language annotations.
We consider posts with three characteristics: anti-Black language, African American English dialect, and vulgarity.
Our results show strong associations between annotator identity and beliefs and their ratings of toxicity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-11-15T18:58:20Z) - News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation.
Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content.
The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z) - The Matter of Chance: Auditing Web Search Results Related to the 2020
U.S. Presidential Primary Elections Across Six Search Engines [68.8204255655161]
We look at the text search results for "us elections", "donald trump", "joe biden" and "bernie sanders" queries on Google, Baidu, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo, and Yandex.
Our findings indicate substantial differences in the search results between search engines and multiple discrepancies within the results generated for different agents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-03T11:18:19Z) - Information Consumption and Social Response in a Segregated Environment:
the Case of Gab [74.5095691235917]
This work provides a characterization of the interaction patterns within Gab around the COVID-19 topic.
We find that there are no strong statistical differences in the social response to questionable and reliable content.
Our results provide insights toward the understanding of coordinated inauthentic behavior and on the early-warning of information operation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-03T11:34:25Z) - Eliminating Search Intent Bias in Learning to Rank [0.32228025627337864]
We study how differences in user search intent can influence click activities and determined that there exists a bias between user search intent and the relevance of the document relevance.
We propose a search intent bias hypothesis that can be applied to most existing click models to improve their ability to learn unbiased relevance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-02-08T17:07:37Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.