arXiv subjects

Eshwar Chandrasekharan

Publications and source records attributed to Eshwar Chandrasekharan.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

Algorithmic Cultivation: How Social Media Feeds Shape User Language

Algorithmic feeds have become primary environments for encountering information online, yet while they shape what people see, less is known about how sustained feed exposure shapes how people write. Drawing on Cultivation Theory, we examine whether algorithmic feeds function as online environments that leave measurable traces in users' language. We leverage a large-scale longitudinal dataset of 235M posts by 4M users on Bluesky, and conduct a quasi-experimental study matching an initial pool of 368,513 users exposed to one of three feeds -- News, Science, and Blacksky -- with a pool of 2,001,915 active control users who did not engage with any of these feeds. We examine linguistic evolution across three dimensions: lexico-semantics, psycholinguistics, and topics. We find that users exposed to these feeds show significantly greater stylistic accommodation, semantic alignment, and register formalization than matched controls. These effects vary markedly by feed identity -- Blacksky produces the deepest psycholinguistic restructuring, with significant shifts in cognitive processing, affective expression, and pronoun use, while News and Science effects are largely confined to register and topical focus. Regression models reveal that reposting is the most consistent predictor of linguistic convergence across all feeds, whereas posting and bookmarking show feed-dependent effects, with effects differing more than fourfold across feeds. Our work extends Cultivation Theory beyond belief formation to linguistic behavior, demonstrating that feeds function as persistent linguistic environments that gradually shape what and how users write online. Our work has implications for studying algorithmic influence, online identity formation, and the design and governance of feed-based platforms that mediate online interactions.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2026

Masking or Mitigating? Deconstructing the Impact of Query Rewriting on Retriever Biases in RAG

Dense retrievers in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems exhibit systematic biases -- including brevity, position, literal matching, and repetition biases -- that can compromise retrieval quality. Query rewriting techniques are now standard in RAG pipelines, yet their impact on these biases remains unexplored. We present the first systematic study of how query enhancement techniques affect dense retrieval biases, evaluating five methods across six retrievers. Our findings reveal that simple LLM-based rewriting achieves the strongest aggregate bias reduction (54\%), yet fails under adversarial conditions where multiple biases combine. Mechanistic analysis uncovers two distinct mechanisms: simple rewriting reduces bias through increased score variance, while pseudo-document generation methods achieve reduction through genuine decorrelation from bias-inducing features. However, no technique uniformly addresses all biases, and effects vary substantially across retrievers. Our results provide practical guidance for selecting query enhancement strategies based on specific bias vulnerabilities. More broadly, we establish a taxonomy distinguishing query-document interaction biases from document encoding biases, clarifying the limits of query-side interventions for debiasing RAG systems.

cs.IR↗

arXiv2026

From Plausible to Causal: Counterfactual Semantics for Policy Evaluation in Simulated Online Communities

LLM-based social simulations can generate believable community interactions, enabling ``policy wind tunnels'' where governance interventions are tested before deployment. But believability is not causality. Claims like ``intervention $A$ reduces escalation'' require causal semantics that current simulation work typically does not specify. We propose adopting the causal counterfactual framework, distinguishing \textit{necessary causation} (would the outcome have occurred without the intervention?) from \textit{sufficient causation} (does the intervention reliably produce the outcome?). This distinction maps onto different stakeholder needs: moderators diagnosing incidents require evidence about necessity, while platform designers choosing policies require evidence about sufficiency. We formalize this mapping, show how simulation design can support estimation under explicit assumptions, and argue that the resulting quantities should be interpreted as simulator-conditional causal estimates whose policy relevance depends on simulator fidelity. Establishing this framework now is essential: it helps define what adequate fidelity means and moves the field from simulations that look realistic toward simulations that can support policy changes.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Uncovering the Internet's Hidden Values: An Empirical Study of Desirable Behavior Using Highly-Upvoted Content on Reddit

A major task for moderators of online spaces is norm-setting, essentially creating shared norms for user behavior in their communities. Platform design principles emphasize the importance of highlighting norm-adhering examples and explicitly stating community norms. However, norms and values vary between communities and go beyond content-level attributes, making it challenging for platforms and researchers to provide automated ways to identify desirable behavior to be highlighted. Current automated approaches to detect desirability are limited to measures of prosocial behavior, but we do not know whether these measures fully capture the spectrum of what communities value. In this paper, we use upvotes, which express community approval, as a proxy for desirability and examine 16,000 highly-upvoted comments across 80 popular sub-communities on Reddit. Using a large language model, we extract values from these comments across two years (2016 and 2022) and compile 64 and 72 $\textit{macro}$, $\textit{meso}$, and $\textit{micro}$ values for 2016 and 2022 respectively, based on their frequency across communities. Furthermore, we find that existing computational models for measuring prosociality were inadequate to capture on average $82\%$ of the values we extracted. Finally, we show that our approach can not only extract most of the qualitatively-identified values from prior taxonomies, but also uncover new values that are actually encouraged in practice. Our findings highlight the need for nuanced models of desirability that go beyond preexisting prosocial measures. This work has implications for improving moderator understanding of their community values and provides a framework that can supplement qualitative approaches with larger-scale content analyses.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Needling Through the Threads: A Visualization Tool for Navigating Threaded Online Discussions

Navigating large-scale online discussions is difficult due to the rapid pace and large volume of user-generated content. Prior work in CSCW has shown that moderators often struggle to follow multiple simultaneous discussions, track evolving conversations, and maintain contextual understanding--all of which hinder timely and effective moderation. While platforms like Reddit use threaded structures to organize discourse, deeply nested threads can still obscure discussions and make it difficult to grasp the overall trajectory of conversations. In this paper, we present an interactive system called Needle to support better navigation and comprehension of complex discourse within threaded discussions. Needle uses visual analytics to summarize key conversational metrics--such as activity, toxicity levels, and voting trends--over time, offering both high-level insights and detailed breakdowns of discussion threads. Through a user study with ten Reddit moderators, we find that Needle supports moderation by reducing cognitive load in making sense of large discussion, helping prioritize areas that need attention, and providing decision-making supports. Based on our findings, we provide a set of design guidelines to inform future visualization-driven moderation tools and sociotechnical systems. To the best of our knowledge, Needle is one of the first systems to combine interactive visual analytics with human-in-the-loop moderation for threaded online discussions.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

The Language of Approval: Identifying the Drivers of Positive Feedback Online

Positive feedback via likes and awards is central to online governance, yet which attributes of users' posts elicit rewards -- and how these vary across authors and communities -- remains unclear. To examine this, we combine quasi-experimental causal inference with predictive modeling on 11M posts from 100 subreddits. We identify linguistic patterns and stylistic attributes causally linked to rewards, controlling for author reputation, timing, and community context. For example, overtly complicated language, tentative style, and toxicity reduce rewards. We use our set of curated features to train models that can detect highly-upvoted posts with high AUC. Our audit of community guidelines highlights a ``policy-practice gap'' -- most rules focus primarily on civility and formatting requirements, with little emphasis on the attributes identified to drive positive feedback. These results inform the design of community guidelines, support interfaces that teach users how to craft desirable contributions, and moderation workflows that emphasize positive reinforcement over purely punitive enforcement.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

The Hidden Toll of Social Media News: Causal Effects on Psychosocial Wellbeing

News consumption on social media has become ubiquitous, yet how different forms of engagement shape psychosocial outcomes remains unclear. To address this gap, we leveraged a large-scale dataset of ~26M posts and ~45M comments on the BlueSky platform, and conducted a quasi-experimental study, matching 81,345 Treated users exposed to News feeds with 83,711 Control users using stratified propensity score analysis. We examined psychosocial wellbeing, in terms of affective, behavioral, and cognitive outcomes. Our findings reveal that news engagement produces systematic trade-offs: increased depression, stress, and anxiety, yet decreased loneliness and increased social interaction on the platform. Regression models reveal that News feed bookmarking is associated with greater psychosocial deterioration compared to commenting or quoting, with magnitude differences exceeding tenfold. These per-engagement effects accumulate with repeated exposure, showing significant psychosocial impacts. Our work extends theories of news effects beyond crisis-centric frameworks by demonstrating that routine consumption creates distinct psychological dynamics depending on engagement type, and bears implications for tools and interventions for mitigating the psychosocial costs of news consumption on social media.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

MoMoE: Mixture of Moderation Experts Framework for AI-Assisted Online Governance

Large language models (LLMs) have shown great potential in flagging harmful content in online communities. Yet, existing approaches for moderation require a separate model for every community and are opaque in their decision-making, limiting real-world adoption. We introduce Mixture of Moderation Experts (MoMoE), a modular, cross-community framework that adds post-hoc explanations to scalable content moderation. MoMoE orchestrates four operators -- Allocate, Predict, Aggregate, Explain -- and is instantiated as seven community-specialized experts (MoMoE-Community) and five norm-violation experts (MoMoE-NormVio). On 30 unseen subreddits, the best variants obtain Micro-F1 scores of 0.72 and 0.67, respectively, matching or surpassing strong fine-tuned baselines while consistently producing concise and reliable explanations. Although community-specialized experts deliver the highest peak accuracy, norm-violation experts provide steadier performance across domains. These findings show that MoMoE yields scalable, transparent moderation without needing per-community fine-tuning. More broadly, they suggest that lightweight, explainable expert ensembles can guide future NLP and HCI research on trustworthy human-AI governance of online communities.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Towards a Better Modqueue: Designing for Diversity Across Moderator Objectives and Workflows

Reddit relies on volunteer moderators to enforce community rules, configure tools, and review flagged content. This labor is substantial, worth millions in unpaid effort, and increasingly hard to sustain as communities grow. While recent updates to Reddit's modqueue emphasize efficiency and reducing redundancy, recent research shows that moderators use the interface in varied ways, value objectives beyond throughput (such as fairness and accuracy), and often resist features that disrupt workflows. In this paper, we survey 106 active Reddit moderators to examine the objectives they bring to their modqueue work and the kinds of interventions they consider helpful. Our findings highlight wide variation in values and workflows, with no single objective beyond accuracy dominating, and different perspectives on which interventions are useful. To address this diversity, we introduce a simulation-based approach that can complement empirical findings by probing tradeoffs and testing potential interventions, and provide design recommendations based on our findings.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

"Think about it like you're a firefighter": Understanding How Reddit Moderators Use the Modqueue

On Reddit, the moderation queue (modqueue) is a primary interface for moderators to review reported content. Despite its central role in Reddit's community-reliant moderation model, little is known about how moderators actually use it in practice. To address this gap, we surveyed 110 moderators, who collectively oversee more than 400 unique subreddits, and asked them about their usage of the modqueue. Modqueue practices vary widely: some moderators approach it as a daily checklist, others as a hub to infer community-wide patterns, and many still find the queue insufficient to inform their moderation decisions. We also identify persistent challenges around review coordination, inconsistent interface signals, and reliance on third-party tools. Taken together, we show the modqueue is neither a one-size-fits-all solution nor sufficient on its own for supporting moderator review. Our work highlights design opportunities for more modular, integrated, and customizable platform infrastructures that better support the diversity of moderator workflows.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

The Ranking Effect: How Algorithmic Rank Influences Attention on Social Media

Social media feeds have become central to the Internet. Among the most visible are trending feeds, which rank content deemed timely and relevant. To examine how feed signals influence behaviors and perceptions, we conducted a randomized experiment (n = 585) simulating Reddit's r/popular feed. By having participants view identical sets of posts in different orders, we isolate the effects of rank and social proof on engagement and perceived relevance, trustworthiness, and quality. We found that lower-ranked posts received about 40% less engagement, despite participants rarely reporting rank as a factor in their choices. In contrast, neither rank nor social proof shifted perceptions across the three dimensions. We also observed demographic patterns: older participants were more skeptical of trending content, while those with less formal education expressed greater trust. Overall, our findings show that algorithmic curation implicitly steers attention, with implications for platform design, research on algorithmic influence, and policy.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

ArgCMV: An Argument Summarization Benchmark for the LLM-era

Key point extraction is an important task in argument summarization which involves extracting high-level short summaries from arguments. Existing approaches for KP extraction have been mostly evaluated on the popular ArgKP21 dataset. In this paper, we highlight some of the major limitations of the ArgKP21 dataset and demonstrate the need for new benchmarks that are more representative of actual human conversations. Using SoTA large language models (LLMs), we curate a new argument key point extraction dataset called ArgCMV comprising of around 12K arguments from actual online human debates spread across over 3K topics. Our dataset exhibits higher complexity such as longer, co-referencing arguments, higher presence of subjective discourse units, and a larger range of topics over ArgKP21. We show that existing methods do not adapt well to ArgCMV and provide extensive benchmark results by experimenting with existing baselines and latest open source models. This work introduces a novel KP extraction dataset for long-context online discussions, setting the stage for the next generation of LLM-driven summarization research.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

The Chilling: Identifying Strategic Antisocial Behavior Online and Examining the Impact on Journalists

On social platforms like Twitter, strategic targeted attacks are becoming increasingly common, especially against vulnerable groups such as female journalists. Two key challenges in identifying strategic online behavior are the complex structure of online conversations and the hidden nature of potential strategies that drive user behavior. To address these, we develop a new tree structured Transformer model that categorizes replies based on their hierarchical conversation structures. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposed classification model can effectively detect different user groups, namely attackers, supporters, and bystanders, and their latent strategies. To demonstrate the utility of our approach, we apply this classifier to real time Twitter data and conduct a series of quantitative analyses on the interactions between journalists with different groups of users. Our classification approach allows us to not only explore strategic behaviors of attackers but also those of supporters and bystanders who engage in online interactions. When examining the impact of online attacks, we find a strong correlation between the presence of attackers' interactions and chilling effects, where journalists tend to slow their subsequent posting behavior. This paper provides a deeper understanding of how different user groups engage in online discussions and highlights the detrimental effects of attacker presence on journalists, other users, and conversational outcomes. Our findings underscore the need for social platforms to develop tools that address coordinated toxicity. By detecting patterns of coordinated attacks early, platforms could limit the visibility of toxic content to prevent escalation. Additionally, providing journalists and users with tools for real time reporting could empower them to manage hostile interactions more effectively.

cs.SI↗

arXiv2025

Examining Algorithmic Curation on Social Media: An Empirical Audit of Reddit's r/popular Feed

Platforms are increasingly relying on algorithms to curate the content within users' social media feeds. However, the growing prominence of proprietary, algorithmically curated feeds has concealed what factors influence the presentation of content on social media feeds and how that presentation affects user behavior. This lack of transparency can be detrimental to users, from reducing users' agency over their content consumption to the propagation of misinformation and toxic content. To uncover details about how these feeds operate and influence user behavior, we conduct an empirical audit of Reddit's algorithmically curated trending feed called r/popular. Using 10K r/popular posts collected by taking snapshots of the feed over 11 months, we find that recent comments help a post remain on r/popular longer and climb the feed. We also find that posts below rank 80 correspond to a sharp decline in activity compared to posts above. When examining the effects of having a higher proportion of undesired behavior -- i.e., moderator-removed and toxic comments -- we find no significant evidence that it helps posts stay on r/popular for longer. Although posts closer to the top receive more undesired comments, we find this increase to coincide with a broader increase in overall engagement -- rather than indicating a disproportionate effect on undesired activity. The relationships between algorithmic rank and engagement highlight the extent to which algorithms employed by social media platforms essentially determine which content is prioritized and which is not. We conclude by discussing how content creators, consumers, and moderators on social media platforms can benefit from empirical audits aimed at improving transparency in algorithmically curated feeds.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Does Positive Reinforcement Work?: A Quasi-Experimental Study of the Effects of Positive Feedback on Reddit

Social media platform design often incorporates explicit signals of positive feedback. Some moderators provide positive feedback with the goal of positive reinforcement, but are often unsure of their ability to actually influence user behavior. Despite its widespread use and theory touting positive feedback as crucial for user motivation, its effect on recipients is relatively unknown. This paper examines how positive feedback impacts Reddit users and evaluates its differential effects to understand who benefits most from receiving positive feedback. Through a causal inference study of 11M posts across 4 months, we find that users who received positive feedback made more frequent (2% per day) and higher quality (57% higher score; 2% fewer removals per day) posts compared to a set of matched control users. Our findings highlight the need for platforms, communities, and moderators to expand their perspective on moderation and complement punitive approaches with positive reinforcement strategies to foster desirable behavior online.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

SLM-Mod: Small Language Models Surpass LLMs at Content Moderation

Large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in many natural language understanding tasks, including content moderation. However, these models can be expensive to query in real-time and do not allow for a community-specific approach to content moderation. To address these challenges, we explore the use of open-source small language models (SLMs) for community-specific content moderation tasks. We fine-tune and evaluate SLMs (less than 15B parameters) by comparing their performance against much larger open- and closed-sourced models in both a zero-shot and few-shot setting. Using 150K comments from 15 popular Reddit communities, we find that SLMs outperform zero-shot LLMs at content moderation -- 11.5% higher accuracy and 25.7% higher recall on average across all communities. Moreover, few-shot in-context learning leads to only a marginal increase in the performance of LLMs, still lacking compared to SLMs. We further show the promise of cross-community content moderation, which has implications for new communities and the development of cross-platform moderation techniques. Finally, we outline directions for future work on language model based content moderation. Code and models can be found at https://github.com/AGoyal0512/SLM-Mod.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Venire: A Machine Learning-Guided Panel Review System for Community Content Moderation

Research into community content moderation often assumes that moderation teams govern with a single, unified voice. However, recent work has found that moderators disagree with one another at modest, but concerning rates. The problem is not the root disagreements themselves. Subjectivity in moderation is unavoidable, and there are clear benefits to including diverse perspectives within a moderation team. Instead, the crux of the issue is that, due to resource constraints, moderation decisions end up being made by individual decision-makers. The result is decision-making that is inconsistent, which is frustrating for community members. To address this, we develop Venire, an ML-backed system for panel review on Reddit. Venire uses a machine learning model trained on log data to identify the cases where moderators are most likely to disagree. Venire fast-tracks these cases for multi-person review. Ideally, Venire allows moderators to surface and resolve disagreements that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. We conduct three studies through which we design and evaluate Venire: a set of formative interviews with moderators, technical evaluations on two datasets, and a think-aloud study in which moderators used Venire to make decisions on real moderation cases. Quantitatively, we demonstrate that Venire is able to improve decision consistency and surface latent disagreements. Qualitatively, we find that Venire helps moderators resolve difficult moderation cases more confidently. Venire represents a novel paradigm for human-AI content moderation, and shifts the conversation from replacing human decision-making to supporting it.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

The Future of Research on Social Technologies: CCC Workshop Visioning Report

Social technologies are the systems, interfaces, features, infrastructures, and architectures that allow people to interact with each other online. These technologies dramatically shape the fabric of our everyday lives, from the information we consume to the people we interact with to the foundations of our culture and politics. While the benefits of social technologies are well documented, the harms, too, have cast a long shadow. To address widespread problems like harassment, disinformation, information access, and mental health concerns, we need to rethink the foundations of how social technologies are designed, sustained, and governed. This report is based on discussions at the Computing Community Consortium Workshop, The Future of Research on Social Technologies, that was held November 2-3, 2023 in Washington, DC. The visioning workshop came together to focus on two questions. What should we know about social technologies, and what is needed to get there? The workshop brought together over 50 information and computer scientists, social scientists, communication and journalism scholars, and policy experts. We used a discussion format, with one day of guiding topics and a second day using an unconference model where participants created discussion topics. The interdisciplinary group of attendees discussed gaps in existing scholarship and the methods, resources, access, and collective effort needed to address those gaps. We also discussed approaches for translating scholarship for various audiences including citizens, funders, educators, industry professionals, and policymakers. This report presents a synthesis of major themes during our discussions. The themes presented are not a summary of what we know already, they are an exploration of what we do not know enough about, and what we should spend more effort and investment on in the coming years.

cs.SI↗