Abstract
Abstract Given the scale of user-generated content online, the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to flag problematic posts is inevitable, but users do not trust such automated moderation of content. We explore if (a) involving human moderators in the curation process and (b) affording “interactive transparency,” wherein users participate in curation, can promote appropriate reliance on AI. We test this through a 3 (Source: AI, Human, Both) × 3 (Transparency: No Transparency, Transparency-Only, Interactive Transparency) × 2 (Classification Decision: Flagged, Not Flagged) between-subjects online experiment (N = 676) involving classification of hate speech and suicidal ideation. We discovered that users trust AI for the moderation of content just as much as humans, but it depends on the heuristic that is triggered when they are told AI is the source of moderation. We also found that allowing users to provide feedback to the algorithm enhances trust by increasing user agency.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
