Understanding the Perceptions of Trigger Warning and Content Warning on Social Media Platforms in the U.S

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.15429v1
• Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 20:46:48 GMT
• Title: Understanding the Perceptions of Trigger Warning and Content Warning on Social Media Platforms in the U.S
• Authors: Xinyi Zhang, Muskan Gupta, Emily Altland, Sang Won Lee,
• Abstract summary: The prevalence of distressing content on social media raises concerns about users' mental well-being.<n>We conducted a semi-structured interview study with 15 general social media users.<n>Our findings reveal challenges across three key stakeholders.
• Score: 7.817924031262163
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The prevalence of distressing content on social media raises concerns about users' mental well-being, prompting the use of trigger warnings (TW) and content warnings (CW). However, inconsistent implementation of TW/CW across platforms and the lack of standardized practices confuse users regarding these warnings. To better understand how users experienced and utilized these warnings, we conducted a semi-structured interview study with 15 general social media users. Our findings reveal challenges across three key stakeholders: viewers, who need to decide whether to engage with warning-labeled content; posters, who struggle with whether and how to apply TW/CW to the content; and platforms, whose design features shape the visibility and usability of warnings. While users generally expressed positive attitudes toward warnings, their understanding of TW/CW usage was limited. Based on these insights, we proposed a conceptual framework of the TW/CW mechanisms from multiple stakeholders' perspectives. Lastly, we further reflected on our findings and discussed the opportunities for social media platforms to enhance users' TW/CW experiences, fostering a more trauma-informed social media environment.

Related papers

• Illusions of Relevance: Using Content Injection Attacks to Deceive Retrievers, Rerankers, and LLM Judges [52.96987928118327]
  We find that embedding models for retrieval, rerankers, and large language model (LLM) relevance judges are vulnerable to content injection attacks.<n>We identify two primary threats: (1) inserting unrelated or harmful content within passages that still appear deceptively "relevant", and (2) inserting entire queries or key query terms into passages to boost their perceived relevance.<n>Our study systematically examines the factors that influence an attack's success, such as the placement of injected content and the balance between relevant and non-relevant material.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T18:02:15Z)
• MisinfoEval: Generative AI in the Era of "Alternative Facts" [50.069577397751175]
  We introduce a framework for generating and evaluating large language model (LLM) based misinformation interventions. We present (1) an experiment with a simulated social media environment to measure effectiveness of misinformation interventions, and (2) a second experiment with personalized explanations tailored to the demographics and beliefs of users. Our findings confirm that LLM-based interventions are highly effective at correcting user behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T18:16:50Z)
• Rethinking the Evaluation of Dialogue Systems: Effects of User Feedback on Crowdworkers and LLMs [57.16442740983528]
  In ad-hoc retrieval, evaluation relies heavily on user actions, including implicit feedback. The role of user feedback in annotators' assessment of turns in a conversational perception has been little studied. We focus on how the evaluation of task-oriented dialogue systems ( TDSs) is affected by considering user feedback, explicit or implicit, as provided through the follow-up utterance of a turn being evaluated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T16:45:50Z)
• MIDDAG: Where Does Our News Go? Investigating Information Diffusion via Community-Level Information Pathways [114.42360191723469]
  We present MIDDAG, an intuitive, interactive system that visualizes the information propagation paths on social media triggered by COVID-19-related news articles. We construct communities among users and develop the propagation forecasting capability, enabling tracing and understanding of how information is disseminated at a higher level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-04T02:08:11Z)
• Explainable Abuse Detection as Intent Classification and Slot Filling [66.80201541759409]
  We introduce the concept of policy-aware abuse detection, abandoning the unrealistic expectation that systems can reliably learn which phenomena constitute abuse from inspecting the data alone. We show how architectures for intent classification and slot filling can be used for abuse detection, while providing a rationale for model decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T03:33:30Z)
• Meaningful Context, a Red Flag, or Both? Users' Preferences for Enhanced Misinformation Warnings on Twitter [6.748225062396441]
  This study proposes user-tailored improvements in the soft moderation of misinformation on social media. We ran an A/B evaluation with the Twitter's original warning tags in a 337 participant usability study. The majority of the participants preferred the enhancements as a nudge toward recognizing and avoiding misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-02T22:47:49Z)
• PROVENANCE: An Intermediary-Free Solution for Digital Content Verification [3.82273842587301]
  Provenance warns users when the content they are looking at may be misinformation or disinformation. It is also designed to improve media literacy among its users. Unlike similar plugins, which require human experts to provide evaluations, Provenance's state of the art technology does not require human input.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-16T21:42:23Z)
• 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)
• Adapting Security Warnings to Counter Online Disinformation [6.592035021489205]
  We adapt methods and results from the information security warning literature to design effective disinformation warnings. We found that users routinely ignore contextual warnings, but users notice interstitial warnings. We found that a warning's design could effectively inform users or convey a risk of harm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-25T01:10:57Z)
• ETHOS: an Online Hate Speech Detection Dataset [6.59720246184989]
  We present 'ETHOS', a textual dataset with two variants: binary and multi-label, based on YouTube and Reddit comments validated using the Figure-Eight crowdsourcing platform. Our key assumption is that, even gaining a small amount of labelled data from such a time-consuming process, we can guarantee hate speech occurrences in the examined material.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-11T08:59:57Z)
• Quantifying the Vulnerabilities of the Online Public Square to Adversarial Manipulation Tactics [43.98568073610101]
  We use a social media model to quantify the impacts of several adversarial manipulation tactics on the quality of content. We find that the presence of influential accounts, a hallmark of social media, exacerbates the vulnerabilities of online communities to manipulation. These insights suggest countermeasures that platforms could employ to increase the resilience of social media users to manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-07-13T21:12:08Z)

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.