skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


  • NSF Public Access
  • Search Results
  • Data Subjects' Conceptualizations of and Attitudes Toward Automatic Emotion Recognition-Enabled Wellbeing Interventions on Social Media
Title: Data Subjects' Conceptualizations of and Attitudes Toward Automatic Emotion Recognition-Enabled Wellbeing Interventions on Social Media
Automatic emotion recognition (ER)-enabled wellbeing interventions use ER algorithms to infer the emotions of a data subject (i.e., a person about whom data is collected or processed to enable ER) based on data generated from their online interactions, such as social media activity, and intervene accordingly. The potential commercial applications of this technology are widely acknowledged, particularly in the context of social media. Yet, little is known about data subjects' conceptualizations of and attitudes toward automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions. To address this gap, we interviewed 13 US adult social media data subjects regarding social media-based automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions. We found that participants' attitudes toward automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions were predominantly negative. Negative attitudes were largely shaped by how participants compared their conceptualizations of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to the humans that traditionally deliver wellbeing support. Comparisons between AI and human wellbeing interventions were based upon human attributes participants doubted AI could hold: 1) helpfulness and authentic care; 2) personal and professional expertise; 3) morality; and 4) benevolence through shared humanity. In some cases, participants' attitudes toward automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions shifted when participants conceptualized automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions' impact on others, rather than themselves. Though with reluctance, a minority of participants held more positive attitudes toward their conceptualizations of automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions, citing their potential to benefit others: 1) by supporting academic research; 2) by increasing access to wellbeing support; and 3) through egregious harm prevention. However, most participants anticipated harms associated with their conceptualizations of automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions for others, such as re-traumatization, the spread of inaccurate health information, inappropriate surveillance, and interventions informed by inaccurate predictions. Lastly, while participants had qualms about automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions, we identified three development and delivery qualities of automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions upon which their attitudes toward them depended: 1) accuracy; 2) contextual sensitivity; and 3) positive outcome. Our study is not motivated to make normative statements about whether or how automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions should exist, but to center voices of the data subjects affected by this technology. We argue for the inclusion of data subjects in the development of requirements for ethical and trustworthy ER applications. To that end, we discuss ethical, social, and policy implications of our findings, suggesting that automatic ER-enabled wellbeing interventions imagined by participants are incompatible with aims to promote trustworthy, socially aware, and responsible AI technologies in the current practical and regulatory landscape in the US.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2020872
PAR ID:
10437759
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Volume:
5
Issue:
CSCW2
ISSN:
2573-0142
Page Range / eLocation ID:
1 to 34
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; (, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)
    The growth of technologies promising to infer emotions raises political and ethical concerns, including concerns regarding their accuracy and transparency. A marginalized perspective in these conversations is that of data subjects potentially affected by emotion recognition. Taking social media as one emotion recognition deployment context, we conducted interviews with data subjects (i.e., social media users) to investigate their notions about accuracy and transparency in emotion recognition and interrogate stated attitudes towards these notions and related folk theories. We find that data subjects see accurate inferences as uncomfortable and as threatening their agency, pointing to privacy and ambiguity as desired design principles for social media platforms. While some participants argued that contemporary emotion recognition must be accurate, others raised concerns about possibilities for contesting the technology and called for better transparency. Furthermore, some challenged the technology altogether, highlighting that emotions are complex, relational, performative, and situated. In interpreting our findings, we identify new folk theories about accuracy and meaningful transparency in emotion recognition. Overall, our analysis shows an unsatisfactory status quo for data subjects that is shaped by power imbalances and a lack of reflexivity and democratic deliberation within platform governance. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)
    Emotion AI, or AI that claims to infer emotional states from various data sources, is increasingly deployed in myriad contexts, including mental healthcare. While emotion AI is celebrated for its potential to improve care and diagnosis, we know little about the perceptions of data subjects most directly impacted by its integration into mental healthcare. In this paper, we qualitatively analyzed U.S. adults' open-ended survey responses (n = 395) to examine their perceptions of emotion AI use in mental healthcare and its potential impacts on them as data subjects. We identify various perceived impacts of emotion AI use in mental healthcare concerning 1) mental healthcare provisions; 2) data subjects' voices; 3) monitoring data subjects for potential harm; and 4) involved parties' understandings and uses of mental health inferences. Participants' remarks highlight ways emotion AI could address existing challenges data subjects may face by 1) improving mental healthcare assessments, diagnoses, and treatments; 2) facilitating data subjects' mental health information disclosures; 3) identifying potential data subject self-harm or harm posed to others; and 4) increasing involved parties' understanding of mental health. However, participants also described their perceptions of potential negative impacts of emotion AI use on data subjects such as 1) increasing inaccurate and biased assessments, diagnoses, and treatments; 2) reducing or removing data subjects' voices and interactions with providers in mental healthcare processes; 3) inaccurately identifying potential data subject self-harm or harm posed to others with negative implications for wellbeing; and 4) involved parties misusing emotion AI inferences with consequences to (quality) mental healthcare access and data subjects' privacy. We discuss how our findings suggest that emotion AI use in mental healthcare is an insufficient techno-solution that may exacerbate various mental healthcare challenges with implications for potential distributive, procedural, and interactional injustices and potentially disparate impacts on marginalized groups. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of Medical Internet Research)
    Background Social networks such as Twitter offer the clinical research community a novel opportunity for engaging potential study participants based on user activity data. However, the availability of public social media data has led to new ethical challenges about respecting user privacy and the appropriateness of monitoring social media for clinical trial recruitment. Researchers have voiced the need for involving users’ perspectives in the development of ethical norms and regulations. Objective This study examined the attitudes and level of concern among Twitter users and nonusers about using Twitter for monitoring social media users and their conversations to recruit potential clinical trial participants. Methods We used two online methods for recruiting study participants: the open survey was (1) advertised on Twitter between May 23 and June 8, 2017, and (2) deployed on TurkPrime, a crowdsourcing data acquisition platform, between May 23 and June 8, 2017. Eligible participants were adults, 18 years of age or older, who lived in the United States. People with and without Twitter accounts were included in the study. Results While nearly half the respondents—on Twitter (94/603, 15.6%) and on TurkPrime (509/603, 84.4%)—indicated agreement that social media monitoring constitutes a form of eavesdropping that invades their privacy, over one-third disagreed and nearly 1 in 5 had no opinion. A chi-square test revealed a positive relationship between respondents’ general privacy concern and their average concern about Internet research (P<.005). We found associations between respondents’ Twitter literacy and their concerns about the ability for researchers to monitor their Twitter activity for clinical trial recruitment (P=.001) and whether they consider Twitter monitoring for clinical trial recruitment as eavesdropping (P<.001) and an invasion of privacy (P=.003). As Twitter literacy increased, so did people’s concerns about researchers monitoring Twitter activity. Our data support the previously suggested use of the nonexceptionalist methodology for assessing social media in research, insofar as social media-based recruitment does not need to be considered exceptional and, for most, it is considered preferable to traditional in-person interventions at physical clinics. The expressed attitudes were highly contextual, depending on factors such as the type of disease or health topic (eg, HIV/AIDS vs obesity vs smoking), the entity or person monitoring users on Twitter, and the monitored information. Conclusions The data and findings from this study contribute to the critical dialogue with the public about the use of social media in clinical research. The findings suggest that most users do not think that monitoring Twitter for clinical trial recruitment constitutes inappropriate surveillance or a violation of privacy. However, researchers should remain mindful that some participants might find social media monitoring problematic when connected with certain conditions or health topics. Further research should isolate factors that influence the level of concern among social media users across platforms and populations and inform the development of more clear and consistent guidelines. 
    more » « less
  4. ; (, CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems)
    Has widespread news of abuse changed the public's perceptions of how user-contributed content from social networking sites like Facebook and LinkedIn can be used? We collected two datasets that reflect participants' attitudes about content ownership, privacy, and control, one in April 2018, while Cambridge Analytica was still in the news, and another in February 2019, after the event had faded from the headlines, and aggregated the data according to participants' awareness of the story, contrasting the attitudes of those who reported the greatest awareness with those who reported the least. Participants with the greatest awareness of the news story's details have more polarized attitudes about reuse, especially the reuse of content as data. They express a heightened desire for data mobility, greater concern about networked privacy rights, increased skepticism of algorithmically targeted advertising and news, and more willingness for social media platforms to demand corrections of inaccurate or deceptive content. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy (IEEE S&P/Oakland '20))
    We investigate the effects of perspective taking, privacy cues, and portrayal of photo subjects (i.e., photo valence) on decisions to share photos of people via social media. In an online experiment we queried 379 participants about 98 photos (that were previously rated for photo valence) in three conditions: (1) Baseline: participants judged their likelihood of sharing each photo; (2) Perspective-taking: participants judged their likelihood of sharing each photo when cued to imagine they are the person in the photo; and (3) Privacy: participants judged their likelihood to share after being cued to consider the privacy of the person in the photo. While participants across conditions indicated a lower likelihood of sharing photos that portrayed people negatively, they – surprisingly – reported a higher likelihood of sharing photos when primed to consider the privacy of the person in the photo. Frequent photo sharers on real-world social media platforms and people without strong personal privacy preferences were especially likely to want to share photos in the experiment, regardless of how the photo portrayed the subject. A follow-up study with 100 participants explaining their responses revealed that the Privacy condition led to a lack of concern with others’ privacy. These findings suggest that developing interventions for reducing photo sharing and protecting the privacy of others is a multivariate problem in which seemingly obvious solutions can sometimes go awry. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email