研究在线权力不对称冲突中人工审核的偏见及AI辅助影响
Power Echoes: Investigating Moderation Biases in Online Power-Asymmetric Conflicts
- 通过真实商家与消费者冲突场景实验，发现审核员倾向支持强势方
- AI辅助能缓解多数偏见，但会加剧少数偏见
- 为权力不对称情境下的人机协同审核提供设计启示
在线权力不对称冲突普遍存在，当前平台主要依赖人工审核。以往研究聚焦于不同场景下的人工审核偏见，但权力不对称冲突中的审核偏见仍未知。本文旨在探究人工审核在权力不对称冲突中表现出的权力相关偏见类型（RQ1），并进一步考察AI建议对这些偏见的影响（RQ2）。为此，我们基于消费者与商家之间的真实冲突，开展包含50名参与者的混合设计实验。结果表明，在两种审核模式下均存在偏向强势方的偏见。AI辅助虽缓解了多数偏见，但也放大了部分偏见。基于此，本文提出未来关于人工审核及人机协同审核系统在权力不对称冲突中的研究方向。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Online power-asymmetric conflicts are prevalent, and most platforms rely on human moderators to conduct moderation currently. Previous studies have been continuously focusing on investigating human moderation biases in different scenarios, while moderation biases under power-asymmetric conflicts remain unexplored. Therefore, we aim to investigate the types of power-related biases human moderators exhibit in power-asymmetric conflict moderation (RQ1) and further explore the influence of AI's suggestions on these biases (RQ2). For this goal, we conducted a mixed design experiment with 50 participants by leveraging the real conflicts between consumers and merchants as a scenario. Results suggest several biases towards supporting the powerful party within these two moderation modes. AI assistance alleviates most biases of human moderation, but also amplifies a few. Based on these results, we propose several insights into future research on human moderation and human-AI collaborative moderation systems for power-asymmetric conflicts.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。