Thoughtful Adoption of NLP for Civic Participation: Understanding Differences Among Policymakers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.22937v1
• Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 11:46:26 GMT
• Title: Thoughtful Adoption of NLP for Civic Participation: Understanding Differences Among Policymakers
• Authors: Jose A. Guridi, Cristobal Cheyre, Qian Yang,
• Abstract summary: Natural language processing tools have the potential to boost civic participation and enhance democratic processes. This study examines how different internal government stakeholders influence NLP tools' thoughtful adoption.
• Score: 17.47825333597848
• License:
• Abstract: Natural language processing (NLP) tools have the potential to boost civic participation and enhance democratic processes because they can significantly increase governments' capacity to gather and analyze citizen opinions. However, their adoption in government remains limited, and harnessing their benefits while preventing unintended consequences remains a challenge. While prior work has focused on improving NLP performance, this work examines how different internal government stakeholders influence NLP tools' thoughtful adoption. We interviewed seven politicians (politically appointed officials as heads of government institutions) and thirteen public servants (career government employees who design and administrate policy interventions), inquiring how they choose whether and how to use NLP tools to support civic participation processes. The interviews suggest that policymakers across both groups focused on their needs for career advancement and the need to showcase the legitimacy and fairness of their work when considering NLP tool adoption and use. Because these needs vary between politicians and public servants, their preferred NLP features and tool designs also differ. Interestingly, despite their differing needs and opinions, neither group clearly identifies who should advocate for NLP adoption to enhance civic participation or address the unintended consequences of a poorly considered adoption. This lack of clarity in responsibility might have caused the governments' low adoption of NLP tools. We discuss how these findings reveal new insights for future HCI research. They inform the design of NLP tools for increasing civic participation efficiency and capacity, the design of other tools and methods that ensure thoughtful adoption of AI tools in government, and the design of NLP tools for collaborative use among users with different incentives and needs.

Related papers

• Algorithmic Transparency and Participation through the Handoff Lens: Lessons Learned from the U.S. Census Bureau's Adoption of Differential Privacy [1.999925939110439]
  We look at the U.S. Census Bureau's adoption of differential privacy in its updated disclosure avoidance system for the 2020 census. This case study seeks to expand our understanding of how technical shifts implicate values. We present three lessons from this case study toward grounding understandings of algorithmic transparency and participation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T15:29:16Z)
• Studying Up Public Sector AI: How Networks of Power Relations Shape Agency Decisions Around AI Design and Use [29.52245155918532]
  We study public sector AI around those who have the power and responsibility to make decisions about the role that AI tools will play in their agency. Our findings shed light on how infrastructural, legal, and social factors create barriers and disincentives to the involvement of a broader range of stakeholders in decisions about AI design and adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T02:31:26Z)
• What Can Natural Language Processing Do for Peer Review? [173.8912784451817]
  In modern science, peer review is widely used, yet it is hard, time-consuming, and prone to error. Since the artifacts involved in peer review are largely text-based, Natural Language Processing has great potential to improve reviewing. We detail each step of the process from manuscript submission to camera-ready revision, and discuss the associated challenges and opportunities for NLP assistance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T16:06:43Z)
• Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
  We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
• Citizen Perspectives on Necessary Safeguards to the Use of AI by Law Enforcement Agencies [0.0]
  This study explores the views of 111 citizens towards AI use by police through interviews. It integrates societal concerns along with propositions of safeguards from negative effects of AI use by LEAs in the context of cybercrime and terrorism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T12:26:34Z)
• SemEval-2023 Task 11: Learning With Disagreements (LeWiDi) [75.85548747729466]
  We report on the second edition of the LeWiDi series of shared tasks. This second edition attracted a wide array of participants resulting in 13 shared task submission papers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-28T12:20:35Z)
• Imagining new futures beyond predictive systems in child welfare: A qualitative study with impacted stakeholders [89.6319385008397]
  We conducted a set of seven design workshops with 35 stakeholders who have been impacted by the child welfare system. We found that participants worried current PRMs perpetuate or exacerbate existing problems in child welfare. Participants suggested new ways to use data and data-driven tools to better support impacted communities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-18T13:49:55Z)
• Improving Human-AI Partnerships in Child Welfare: Understanding Worker Practices, Challenges, and Desires for Algorithmic Decision Support [37.03030554731032]
  We present findings from a series of interviews at a child welfare agency, to understand how they currently make AI-assisted child maltreatment screening decisions. We observe how workers' reliance upon the ADS is guided by (1) their knowledge of rich, contextual information beyond what the AI model captures, (2) their beliefs about the ADS's capabilities and limitations relative to their own, and (4) awareness of misalignments between algorithmic predictions and their own decision-making objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-05T16:10:49Z)
• Inverse Online Learning: Understanding Non-Stationary and Reactionary Policies [79.60322329952453]
  We show how to develop interpretable representations of how agents make decisions. By understanding the decision-making processes underlying a set of observed trajectories, we cast the policy inference problem as the inverse to this online learning problem. We introduce a practical algorithm for retrospectively estimating such perceived effects, alongside the process through which agents update them. Through application to the analysis of UNOS organ donation acceptance decisions, we demonstrate that our approach can bring valuable insights into the factors that govern decision processes and how they change over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T17:40:42Z)
• Citizen Participation and Machine Learning for a Better Democracy [22.682698778214434]
  We report on the progress of a project that aims to address barriers to citizen participation in democratic decision-making processes. The main objectives are to explore if the application of Natural Language Processing (NLP) and machine learning can improve citizens' experience of digital citizen participation platforms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-28T13:30:07Z)
• How Does NLP Benefit Legal System: A Summary of Legal Artificial Intelligence [81.04070052740596]
  Legal Artificial Intelligence (LegalAI) focuses on applying the technology of artificial intelligence, especially natural language processing, to benefit tasks in the legal domain. This paper introduces the history, the current state, and the future directions of research in LegalAI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-25T14:45:15Z)

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.