An official website of the United States government
Abstract Citizen-generated counter speech is a promising way to fight hate speech and promote peaceful, non-polarized discourse. However, there is a lack of large-scale longitudinal studies of its effectiveness for reducing hate speech. To this end, we perform an exploratory analysis of the effectiveness of counter speech using several different macro- and micro-level measures to analyze 180,000 political conversations that took place on German Twitter over four years. We report on the dynamic interactions of hate and counter speech over time and provide insights into whether, as in ‘classic’ bullying situations, organized efforts are more effective than independent individuals in steering online discourse. Taken together, our results build a multifaceted picture of the dynamics of hate and counter speech online. While we make no causal claims due to the complexity of discourse dynamics, our findings suggest that organized hate speech is associated with changes in public discourse and that counter speech—especially when organized—may help curb hateful rhetoric in online discourse.
more »
« less
Leveraging AI for democratic discourse: Chat interventions can improve online political conversations at scale
Political discourse is the soul of democracy, but misunderstanding and conflict can fester in divisive conversations. The widespread shift to online discourse exacerbates many of these problems and corrodes the capacity of diverse societies to cooperate in solving social problems. Scholars and civil society groups promote interventions that make conversations less divisive or more productive, but scaling these efforts to online discourse is challenging. We conduct a large-scale experiment that demonstrates how online conversations about divisive topics can be improved with AI tools. Specifically, we employ a large language model to make real-time, evidence-based recommendations intended to improve participants’ perception of feeling understood. These interventions improve reported conversation quality, promote democratic reciprocity, and improve the tone, without systematically changing the content of the conversation or moving people’s policy attitudes.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2141680
- PAR ID:
- 10523618
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Volume:
- 120
- Issue:
- 41
- ISSN:
- 0027-8424
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Student-centered instruction allows students to take ownership over their learning in the classroom. However, these settings do not always promote productive engagement. Using discourse analysis, student engagement can be analyzed based on how they are interacting with each other while completing in-class group activities. Previous analyses of student engagement in science settings have used methods that do not capture the intricacies of student group interactions such as the flow of conversation and nature of student utterances outside of argumentation or reasoning. However, these features are important to accurately assess student engagement. This study proposes a tiered analytical framework and visualization scheme for analyzing group discussion patterns that allow for a detailed analysis of student discourse moves while discussing scientific topics. This framework allows a researcher to see the flow of an entire conversation within a single schematic. The Student Interaction Discourse Moves framework can be used to extend studies using discourse analysis to determine how student groups work through problems.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Reading and arithmetic are difficult cognitive feats for children to master and youth from low-income communities are often less “school ready” in terms of letter and number recognition skills ( Lee and Burkam, 2002 ). One way to prepare children for school is by encouraging caregivers to engage children in conversations about academically-relevant concepts by using numbers, recognizing shapes, and naming colors ( Levine et al., 2010 ; Fisher et al., 2013 ). Previous research shows that caregiver-child conversations about these topics rarely take place in everyday contexts ( Hassinger-Das et al., 2018 ), but interventions designed to encourage such conversations, like displaying signs in a grocery store, have resulted in significant increases in caregiver-child conversations ( Ridge et al., 2015 ; Hanner et al., 2019 ). We investigated whether a similar brief intervention could change caregiver-child conversations in an everyday context. We observed 212 families in a volunteer-run facility where people who are food-insecure can select food from available donations. Volunteers greet all the clients as they pass through the aisles, offer food, and restock the shelves as needed. About 25% of the clients have children with them and our data consist of observations of the caregiver-child conversations with 2- to 10-year-old children. Half of the observation days consisted of a baseline condition in which the quantity and quality of caregiver-child conversation was observed as the client went through aisles where no signs were displayed, and volunteers merely greeted the clients. The other half of the observation days consisted of a brief intervention where signs were displayed (signs-up condition), where, volunteers greeted the clients and pointed out that there were signs displayed to entertain the children if they were interested. In addition, there was a within-subject manipulation for the intervention condition where each family interacted with two different categories of signs. Half of the signs had academically-relevant content and the other half had non-academically-relevant content. The results demonstrate that the brief intervention used in the signs-up condition increases the quantity of conversation between a caregiver and child. In addition, signs with academically-relevant content increases the quality of the conversation. These findings provide further evidence that brief interventions in an everyday context can change the caregiver-child conversation. Specifically, signs with academically-relevant content may promote school readiness.more » « less
-
Social media platform affordances allow users to interact with content and with each other in diverse ways. For example, on Twitter,1users can like, reply, retweet, or quote another tweet. Though it’s clear that these different features allow various types of interactions, open questions remain about how these different affordances shape the conversations. We examine how two similar, but distinct conversational features on Twitter — specifically reply vs. quote — are used differently. Focusing on the polarized discourse around Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony in July 2019, we look at how these features are employed in conversations between politically aligned and opposed accounts. We use a mixed methods approach, employing grounded qualitative analysis to identify the different conversational and framing strategies salient in that discourse and then quantitatively analyzing how those techniques differed across the different features and political alignments. Our research (1) demonstrates that the quote feature is more often used to broadcast and reply is more often used to reframe the conversation; (2) identifies the different framing strategies that emerge through the use of these features when engaging with politically aligned vs. opposed accounts; (3) discusses how reply and quote features may be re-designed to reduce the adversarial tone of polarized conversations on Twitter-like platforms.more » « less
-
Benjamin, Paaßen; Carrie, Demmans Epp (Ed.)This paper explores the differences between two types of natural language conversations between a student and pedagogical agent(s). Both types of conversations were created for formative assessment purposes. The first type is conversation-based assessment created via knowledge engineering which requires a large amount of human effort. The second type, which is less costly to produce, uses prompt engineering for LLMs based on Evidence-Centered design to create these conversations and glean evidence about students¿½f knowledge, skills and abilities. The current work compares linguistic features of the artificial agent(s) discourse moves in natural language conversations created by the two methodologies. Results indicate that more complex conversations are created by the prompt engineering method which may be more adaptive than the knowledge engineering approach. However, the affordances of prompt engi-neered, LLM generated conversation-based assessment may create more challenges for scoring than the original knowledge engineered conversations. Limitations and implications are dis-cussed.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2311627120
