Navigating the Thin Line: Examining User Behavior in Search to Detect
Engagement and Backfire Effects
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.11201v1
- Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2024 10:28:25 GMT
- Title: Navigating the Thin Line: Examining User Behavior in Search to Detect
Engagement and Backfire Effects
- Authors: F. M. Cau, N. Tintarev
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: Opinionated users often seek information that aligns with their preexisting
beliefs while dismissing contradictory evidence due to confirmation bias. This
conduct hinders their ability to consider alternative stances when searching
the web. Despite this, few studies have analyzed how the diversification of
search results on disputed topics influences the search behavior of highly
opinionated users. To this end, we present a preregistered user study (n = 257)
investigating whether different levels (low and high) of bias metrics and
search results presentation (with or without AI-predicted stances labels) can
affect the stance diversity consumption and search behavior of opinionated
users on three debated topics (i.e., atheism, intellectual property rights, and
school uniforms). Our results show that exposing participants to
(counter-attitudinally) biased search results increases their consumption of
attitude-opposing content, but we also found that bias was associated with a
trend toward overall fewer interactions within the search page. We also found
that 19% of users interacted with queries and search pages but did not select
any search results. When we removed these participants in a post-hoc analysis,
we found that stance labels increased the diversity of stances consumed by
users, particularly when the search results were biased. Our findings highlight
the need for future research to explore distinct search scenario settings to
gain insight into opinionated users' behavior.
Related papers
- Beyond Relevance: Evaluate and Improve Retrievers on Perspective Awareness [56.42192735214931]
retrievers are expected to not only rely on the semantic relevance between the documents and the queries but also recognize the nuanced intents or perspectives behind a user query.
In this work, we study whether retrievers can recognize and respond to different perspectives of the queries.
We show that current retrievers have limited awareness of subtly different perspectives in queries and can also be biased toward certain perspectives.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-04T17:10:00Z) - Generative Echo Chamber? Effects of LLM-Powered Search Systems on
Diverse Information Seeking [49.02867094432589]
Large language models (LLMs) powered conversational search systems have already been used by hundreds of millions of people.
We investigate whether and how LLMs with opinion biases that either reinforce or challenge the user's view change the effect.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-08T18:14:33Z) - 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) - Explaining Search Result Stances to Opinionated People [0.0]
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.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-15T15:08:24Z) - 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) - Approaches to Identify Vulnerabilities to Misinformation: A Research
Agenda [24.80321868079655]
Given the prevalence of online misinformation, Internet users have been shown to frequently fall victim to such information.
We highlight two ongoing avenues of research to identify vulnerable users: detecting cognitive biases and exploring misinformation spreaders.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-21T00:33:39Z) - Exposing Query Identification for Search Transparency [69.06545074617685]
We explore the feasibility of approximate exposing query identification (EQI) as a retrieval task by reversing the role of queries and documents in two classes of search systems.
We derive an evaluation metric to measure the quality of a ranking of exposing queries, as well as conducting an empirical analysis focusing on various practical aspects of approximate EQI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-10-14T20:19:27Z) - 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)
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.