arXiv subjects

Jane Im

Publications and source records attributed to Jane Im.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Enabling Sensitive Conversations with Consent Boundaries: Moa, a Platform for Discussing PhD Advising Relationships

When an individual is harmed by someone in power, such as a workplace manager, it can help to identify allies--people who would offer sympathy, advice, or supportive action. However, ally discovery is fraught because the very people who might be most relevant--e.g., someone who reports to the same manager--might not be sympathetic and could potentially exacerbate the harm. We examine this problem in the specific context of PhD students navigating advising challenges and present a social media platform called "Moa" that brings together a number of features that we believe facilitate ally discovery. Moa's most novel element is an audience selection process that uses what we call consent boundaries, which allow users to flexibly define each post or comment's audience based on factors such as common social identity or lived experience, all while preserving anonymity--neither senders nor recipients learn each other's identities, even as the post reaches the right audience. A 3-week field study with 47 real-world users showed that the features in combination facilitated sensitive conversations about advising, with 22.6% of users using consent boundaries. We discuss both our overall "recipe" for systems for ally discovery and the benefits of a consent-centered approach to design.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

Women's Perspectives on Harm and Justice after Online Harassment

Social media platforms aspire to create online experiences where users can participate safely and equitably. However, women around the world experience widespread online harassment, including insults, stalking, aggression, threats, and non-consensual sharing of sexual photos. This article describes women's perceptions of harm associated with online harassment and preferred platform responses to that harm. We conducted a survey in 14 geographic regions around the world (N = 3,993), focusing on regions whose perspectives have been insufficiently elevated in social media governance decisions (e.g. Mongolia, Cameroon). {Results show} that, on average, women perceive greater harm associated with online harassment than men, especially for non-consensual image sharing. Women also prefer most platform responses compared to men, especially removing content and banning users; however, women are less favorable towards payment as a response. Addressing global gender-based violence online requires understanding how women experience online harms and how they wish for it to be addressed. This is especially important given that the people who build and govern technology are not typically those who are most likely to experience online harms.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

AppealMod: Inducing Friction to Reduce Moderator Workload of Handling User Appeals

As content moderation becomes a central aspect of all social media platforms and online communities, interest has grown in how to make moderation decisions contestable. On social media platforms where individual communities moderate their own activities, the responsibility to address user appeals falls on volunteers from within the community. While there is a growing body of work devoted to understanding and supporting the volunteer moderators' workload, little is known about their practice of handling user appeals. Through a collaborative and iterative design process with Reddit moderators, we found that moderators spend considerable effort in investigating user ban appeals and desired to directly engage with users and retain their agency over each decision. To fulfill their needs, we designed and built AppealMod, a system that induces friction in the appeals process by asking users to provide additional information before their appeals are reviewed by human moderators. In addition to giving moderators more information, we expected the friction in the appeal process would lead to a selection effect among users, with many insincere and toxic appeals being abandoned before getting any attention from human moderators. To evaluate our system, we conducted a randomized field experiment in a Reddit community of over 29 million users that lasted for four months. As a result of the selection effect, moderators viewed only 30% of initial appeals and less than 10% of the toxically worded appeals; yet they granted roughly the same number of appeals when compared with the control group. Overall, our system is effective at reducing moderator workload and minimizing their exposure to toxic content while honoring their preference for direct engagement and agency in appeals.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2022

Human-AI Guidelines in Practice: Leaky Abstractions as an Enabler in Collaborative Software Teams

In conventional software development, user experience (UX) designers and engineers collaborate through separation of concerns (SoC): designers create human interface specifications, and engineers build to those specifications. However, we argue that Human-AI systems thwart SoC because human needs must shape the design of the AI interface, the underlying AI sub-components, and training data. How do designers and engineers currently collaborate on AI and UX design? To find out, we interviewed 21 industry professionals (UX researchers, AI engineers, data scientists, and managers) across 14 organizations about their collaborative work practices and associated challenges. We find that hidden information encapsulated by SoC challenges collaboration across design and engineering concerns. Practitioners describe inventing ad-hoc representations exposing low-level design and implementation details (which we characterize as leaky abstractions) to "puncture" SoC and share information across expertise boundaries. We identify how leaky abstractions are employed to collaborate at the AI-UX boundary and formalize a process of creating and using leaky abstractions.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2021

Searching For or Reviewing Evidence Improves Crowdworkers' Misinformation Judgments and Reduces Partisan Bias

Can crowd workers be trusted to judge whether news-like articles circulating on the Internet are misleading, or does partisanship and inexperience get in the way? And can the task be structured in a way that reduces partisanship? We assembled pools of both liberal and conservative crowd raters and tested three ways of asking them to make judgments about 374 articles. In a no research condition, they were just asked to view the article and then render a judgment. In an individual research condition, they were also asked to search for corroborating evidence and provide a link to the best evidence they found. In a collective research condition, they were not asked to search, but instead to review links collected from workers in the individual research condition. Both research conditions reduced partisan disagreement in judgments. The individual research condition was most effective at producing alignment with journalists' assessments. In this condition, the judgments of a panel of sixteen or more crowd workers were better than that of a panel of three expert journalists, as measured by alignment with a held out journalist's ratings.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2019

Still out there: Modeling and Identifying Russian Troll Accounts on Twitter

There is evidence that Russia's Internet Research Agency attempted to interfere with the 2016 U.S. election by running fake accounts on Twitter - often referred to as "Russian trolls". In this work, we: 1) develop machine learning models that predict whether a Twitter account is a Russian troll within a set of 170K control accounts; and, 2) demonstrate that it is possible to use this model to find active accounts on Twitter still likely acting on behalf of the Russian state. Using both behavioral and linguistic features, we show that it is possible to distinguish between a troll and a non-troll with a precision of 78.5% and an AUC of 98.9%, under cross-validation. Applying the model to out-of-sample accounts still active today, we find that up to 2.6% of top journalists' mentions are occupied by Russian trolls. These findings imply that the Russian trolls are very likely still active today. Additional analysis shows that they are not merely software-controlled bots, and manage their online identities in various complex ways. Finally, we argue that if it is possible to discover these accounts using externally - accessible data, then the platforms - with access to a variety of private internal signals - should succeed at similar or better rates.

cs.SI↗