Search for: All records

Trained and optimized for typical and fluent speech, speech AI works poorly for people with speech diversities, often interrupting them and misinterpreting their speech. The increasing deployment of speech AI in automated phone menus, AI-conducted job interviews, and everyday devices poses tangible risks to people with speech diversities. To mitigate these risks, this workshop aims to build a multidisciplinary coalition and set the research agenda for fair and accessible speech AI. Bringing together a broad group of academics and practitioners with diverse perspectives, including HCI, AI, and other relevant fields such as disability studies, speech language pathology, and law, this workshop will establish a shared understanding of the technical challenges for fair and accessible speech AI, as well as its ramifications in design, user experience, policy, and society. In addition, the workshop will invite and highlight first-person accounts from people with speech diversities, facilitating direct dialogues and collaboration between speech AI developers and the impacted communities. The key outcomes of this workshop include a summary paper that synthesizes our learnings and outlines the roadmap for improving speech AI for people with speech diversities, as well as a community of scholars, practitioners, activists, and policy makers interested in driving progress in this domain. 

User adoption of security and privacy (S&P) best practices remains low, despite sustained efforts by researchers and practitioners. Social influence is a proven method for guiding user S&P behavior, though most work has focused on studying peer influence, which is only possible with a known social graph. In a study of 104 Facebook users, we instead demonstrate that crowdsourced S&P suggestions are significantly influential. We also tested how reflective writing affected participants’ S&P decisions, with and without suggestions. With reflective writing, participants were less likely to accept suggestions — both social and Facebook default suggestions. Of particular note, when reflective writing participants were shown the Facebook default suggestion, they not only rejected it but also (unknowingly) configured their settings in accordance with expert recommendations. Our work suggests that both non-personal social influence and reflective writing can positively influence users’ S&P decisions, but have negative interactions.