提出多维度评估框架，帮决策者权衡干预措施的实效与可行性。
Beyond Effectiveness: A Multi-Criteria Framework for Comparing Practical Socio-Technical Interventions
- 构建包含五项指标的评估框架，兼顾效果与实施成本。
- 39位专家评估40个干预方案，发现高效未必易推广。
- 适用于内容审核、推荐系统等社会技术场景的决策参考。
在内容审核、隐私界面、推荐系统等社会技术领域，设计者与政策制定者面临越来越多的干预选项，却缺乏系统比较依据。以往研究多仅从有效性角度评估单一干预，而对成本、努力程度和政治可行性等实施约束常被忽略。本文提出一个多准则评估框架，并以虚假信息治理为例进行实证分析。我们对N=39位研究人员调研了40个可操作化干预措施，涵盖政治可行性、有效性、用户接受度、成本和实施努力五个维度。结果表明，专家认为最有效的干预并不总能获得公众认可或具备高可行性。该矛盾对超越虚假信息领域的社会技术干预设计具有广泛启示，并为实践者提供了权衡取舍的决策框架。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Designers and policymakers in sociotechnical domains like content moderation, privacy interfaces, recommender systems and beyond, must choose among a growing menu of proposed interventions, but typically lack a principled basis for comparing them. Prior work tends to evaluate interventions individually and mostly along the effectiveness criteria, while implementation constraints such as cost, effort and feasibility are often considered separately. We present a multi-criteria framework for evaluating sociotechnical interventions. This framework is instantiated through the case of misinformation, a domain of intense focus for proposed countermeasures. We survey $N=39$ researchers on 40 operationalized interventions across five evaluative criteria: political feasibility, effectiveness, user acceptance, cost, and implementation effort. We find that the interventions that experts judge to be the most effective are not always the most acceptable to the public or the most feasible to implement. We also discuss how this tension has implications for the design of sociotechnical interventions beyond misinformation, and offer a decision framework for practitioners navigating the trade-offs of sociotechnical interventions.
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。