Social media platforms are increasingly adopting features that display crowdsourced context alongside posts, a technique pioneered by X’s Community Notes. These systems—which we term Crowdsourced Context Systems (CCS)—have the potential to reshape the information ecosystem as major platforms embrace them as alternatives to professional fact-checking. To understand the features and implications of these systems, we conduct a systematic literature review of existing CCS research (n=56) and analyze real-world CCS implementations. Based on our analysis, we develop a framework with two components. First, we present a theoretical model to conceptualize and define CCS. Second, we identify a design space encompassing six aspects: participation, inputs, curation, presentation, platform treatment, and transparency. We also surface normative implications of different CCS design and implementation choices. Our work integrates theoretical, design, and ethical perspectives to establish a foundation for future human-centered research on Crowdsourced Context Systems.

In this position paper, we argue that baseball-and sports more broadly-provide a unique and under-explored opportunity for researchers to study human-robot interaction (HRI) in real-world settings. Using the rise of robot umpires in baseball as a primary example, we examine emerging themes such as power dynamics among players and umpires, labor implications, and technical challenges. We emphasize the affordances and benefits of studying sports within HRI, including the integration of interdisciplinary perspectives, the large-scale deployment of robots, and the examination of their role in deeply rooted cultural practices.

As AI technologies improve, people are increasingly willing to delegate tasks to AI agents. In many cases, the human decision-maker chooses whether to delegate to an AI agent based on properties of the specific instance of the decision-making problem they are facing. Since humans typically lack full awareness of all the factors relevant to this choice for a given decision-making instance, they perform a kind of categorization by treating indistinguishable instances - those that have the same observable features - as the same. In this paper, we define the problem of designing the optimal algorithmic delegate in the presence of categories. This is an important dimension in the design of algorithms to work with humans, since we show that the optimal delegate can be an arbitrarily better teammate than the optimal standalone algorithmic agent. The solution to this optimal delegation problem is not obvious: we discover that this problem is fundamentally combinatorial, and illustrate the complex relationship between the optimal design and the properties of the decision-making task even in simple settings. Indeed, we show that finding the optimal delegate is computationally hard in general. However, we are able to find efficient algorithms for producing the optimal delegate in several broad cases of the problem, including when the optimal action may be decomposed into functions of features observed by the human and the algorithm. Finally, we run computational experiments to simulate a designer updating an algorithmic delegate over time to be optimized for when it is actually adopted by users, and show that while this process does not recover the optimal delegate in general, the resulting delegate often performs quite well.

Self-service machines are a form of pseudo-automation; rather than actually automate tasks, they offset them to unpaid customers. Typically implemented for customer convenience and to reduce labor costs, self-service is often criticized for worsening customer service and increasing loss and theft for retailers. Though millions of frontline service workers continue to interact with these technologies on a day-to-day basis, little is known about how these machines change the nature of frontline labor. Through interviews with current and former cashiers who work with self-checkout technologies, we investigate how technology that offsets labor from an employee to a customer can reconfigure frontline work. We find three changes to cashiering tasks as a result of self-checkout: (1) Working at self-checkout involved parallel demands from multiple customers, (2) self-checkout work was more problem-oriented, and (3) traditional checkout began to become more demanding as easier transactions were filtered to self-checkout. As their interactions with customers became more focused on problems, monitoring, and policing, cashiers were often positioned as adversaries to customers at self-checkout. To cope with this perceived adversarialism, cashiers engaged in a form of relational patchwork , using techniques like scapegoating the self-checkout machine and providing excessive customer service in order to maintain positive customer interactions in the face of potential conflict. Our findings highlight how even under pseudo-automation, workers must engage in relational work to heal and prevent negative human-to-human interactions so that machines can be properly implemented in context. We recommend future CSCW scholars consider the particular conditions that lead to relational patchworking demands on frontline workers. Understanding these conditions can help scholars and practitioners to more fully account for the multivalent effects of these technologies on workers, in retail and beyond.

Predicting future outcomes is a prevalent application of machine learning in social impact domains. Examples range from predicting student success in education to predicting disease risk in healthcare. Practitioners recognize that the ultimate goal is not just to predict but to act effectively. Increasing evidence suggests that relying on outcome predictions for downstream interventions may not have desired results. In most domains there exists a multitude of possible interventions for each individual, making the challenge of taking effective action more acute. Even when causal mechanisms connecting the individual's latent states to outcomes are well understood, in any given instance (a specific student or patient), practitioners still need to infer---from budgeted measurements of latent states---which of many possible interventions will be most effective for this individual. With this in mind, we ask: when are accurate predictors of outcomes helpful for identifying the most suitable intervention? Through a simple model encompassing actions, latent states, and measurements, we demonstrate that pure outcome prediction rarely results in the most effective policy for taking actions, even when combined with other measurements. We find that except in cases where there is a single decisive action for improving the outcome, outcome prediction never maximizes "action value", the utility of taking actions. Making measurements of actionable latent states, where specific actions lead to desired outcomes, may considerably enhance the action value compared to outcome prediction, and the degree of improvement depends on action costs and the outcome model. This analysis emphasizes the need to go beyond generic outcome prediction in interventional settings by incorporating knowledge of plausible actions and latent states.

Much attention has been paid to the risk artificial intelligence poses to employment, particularly in low-wage industries. The question has invited well-placed concern from policymakers, as the prospect of millions of low-skilled workers finding themselves suddenly without employment brings with it the potential for tremendous social and economic disruption. Long-haul truck driving is perceived as a prime target for such displacement, due to the fast-developing technical capabilities of autonomous vehicles (many of which lend themselves to the specific needs of truck driving), characteristics of trucking labor, and the political economy of the industry. In most of the public rhetoric about the threat of the self-driving truck, the trucker is seen as a displaced party. He is displaced both physically and economically: removed from the cab of the truck, and from his means of economic provision. The robot has replaced his imperfect, disobedient, tired, and inefficient body, rendering him redundant, irrelevant, and jobless. But the reality is more complicated. The intrusion of automation into the truck cab certainly presents a threat to the trucker, but the threat is not solely or even primarily experienced, as it is so often described, as displacement. The trucker is still in the cab, doing the work of truck driving-but he is joined there by intelligent systems that monitor his body directly. Hats that monitor his brain waves and head position, vests that track his heart rate, cameras trained on his eyelids for signs of fatigue or inattention: these systems flash lights in his face, jolt his seat, and send reports to his dispatcher or even his family members should the trucker's focus waver. As more trucking firms integrate such technologies into their safety programs, truckers are not being displaced by intelligent systems so much as they are experiencing the emergence of intelligent systems as a compelled hybridization, a very intimate incursion into their work and bodies. This talk considers the dual, conflicting narratives of job replacement by robots and of bodily integration with robots, to assess the true range of AI's potential effects on low-wage work.

Despite growing calls for participation in AI design, there are to date few empirical studies of what these processes look like and how they can be structured for meaningful engagement with domain experts. In this paper, we examine a notable yet understudied AI design process in the legal domain that took place over a decade ago, the impact of which still informs legal automation efforts today. Specifically, we examine the design and evaluation activities that took place from 2006 to 2011 within the Text REtrieval Conference's (TREC) Legal Track, a computational research venue hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technologies. The Legal Track of TREC is notable in the history of AI research and practice because it relied on a range of participatory approaches to facilitate the design and evaluation of new computational techniques-in this case, for automating attorney document review for civil litigation matters. Drawing on archival research and interviews with coordinators of the Legal Track of TREC, our analysis reveals how an interactive simulation methodology allowed computer scientists and lawyers to become co-designers and helped bridge the chasm between computational research and real-world, high-stakes litigation practice. In analyzing this case from the recent past, our aim is to empirically ground contemporary critiques of AI development and evaluation and the calls for greater participation as a means to address them.

COVID-19 has been a sustained and global crisis with a strong continual impact on daily life. Staying accurately informed about COVID-19 has been key to personal and communal safety, especially for essential workers---individuals whose jobs have required them to go into work throughout the pandemic---as their employment has exposed them to higher risks of contracting the virus. Through 14 semi-structured interviews, we explore how essential workers across industries navigated the COVID-19 information landscape to get up-to-date information in the early months of the pandemic. We find that essential workers living through a sustained crisis have a broad set of information needs. We summarize these needs in a framework that centers 1) fulfilling job requirements, 2) assessing personal risk, and 3) keeping up with crisis news coverage. Our findings also show that the sustained nature of COVID-19 crisis coverage led essential workers to experience breaking points and develop coping strategies. Additionally, we show how workplace communications may act as a mediating force in this process: lack of adequate information in the workplace caused workers to struggle with navigating a contested information landscape, while consistent updates and information exchanges at work could ease the stress of information overload. Our findings extend the crisis informatics field by providing contextual knowledge about the information needs of essential workers during a sustained crisis.

To address the widespread problem of uncivil behavior, many online discussion platforms employ human moderators to take action against objectionable content, such as removing it or placing sanctions on its authors. Thisreactive paradigm of taking action against already-posted antisocial content is currently the most common form of moderation, and has accordingly underpinned many recent efforts at introducing automation into the moderation process. Comparatively less work has been done to understand other moderation paradigms---such as proactively discouraging the emergence of antisocial behavior rather than reacting to it---and the role algorithmic support can play in these paradigms. In this work, we investigate such a proactive framework for moderation in a case study of a collaborative setting: Wikipedia Talk Pages. We employ a mixed methods approach, combining qualitative and design components for a holistic analysis. Through interviews with moderators, we find that despite a lack of technical and social support, moderators already engage in a number of proactive moderation behaviors, such as preemptively intervening in conversations to keep them on track. Further, we explore how automation could assist with this existing proactive moderation workflow by building a prototype tool, presenting it to moderators, and examining how the assistance it provides might fit into their workflow. The resulting feedback uncovers both strengths and drawbacks of the prototype tool and suggests concrete steps towards further developing such assisting technology so it can most effectively support moderators in their existing proactive moderation workflow.

Scholars have recently drawn attention to a range of controversial issues posed by the use of computer vision for automatically generating descriptions of people in images. Despite these concerns, automated image description has become an important tool to ensure equitable access to information for blind and low vision people. In this paper, we investigate the ethical dilemmas faced by companies that have adopted the use of computer vision for producing alt text: textual descriptions of images for blind and low vision people. We use Facebook's automatic alt text tool as our primary case study. First, we analyze the policies that Facebook has adopted with respect to identity categories, such as race, gender, age, etc., and the company's decisions about whether to present these terms in alt text. We then describe an alternative---and manual---approach practiced in the museum community, focusing on how museums determine what to include in alt text descriptions of cultural artifacts. We compare these policies, using notable points of contrast to develop an analytic framework that characterizes the particular apprehensions behind these policy choices. We conclude by considering two strategies that seem to sidestep some of these concerns, finding that there are no easy ways to avoid the normative dilemmas posed by the use of computer vision to automate alt text.

Many policies allocate harms or benefits that are uncertain in nature: they produce distributions over the population in which individuals have different probabilities of incurring harm or benefit. Comparing different policies thus involves a comparison of their corresponding probability distributions, and we observe that in many instances the policies selected in practice are hard to explain by preferences based only on the expected value of the total harm or benefit they produce. In cases where the expected value analysis is not a sufficient explanatory framework, what would be a reasonable model for societal preferences over these distributions? Here we investigate explanations based on the framework of probability weighting from the behavioral sciences, which over several decades has identified systematic biases in how people perceive probabilities. We show that probability weighting can be used to make predictions about preferences over probabilistic distributions of harm and benefit that function quite differently from expected-value analysis, and in a number of cases provide potential explanations for policy preferences that appear hard to motivate by other means. In particular, we identify optimal policies for minimizing perceived total harm and maximizing perceived total benefit that take the distorting effects of probability weighting into account, and we discuss a number of real-world policies that resemble such allocational strategies. Our analysis does not provide specific recommendations for policy choices, but is instead fundamentally interpretive in nature, seeking to describe observed phenomena in policy choices.

Birth stories have become increasingly common on the internet, but they have received little attention as a computational dataset. These unsolicited, publicly posted stories provide rich descriptions of decisions, emotions, and relationships during a common but sometimes traumatic medical experience. These personal details can be illuminating for medical practitioners, and due to their shared structures, birth stories are also an ideal testing ground for narrative analysis techniques. We present an analysis of 2,847 birth stories from an online forum and demonstrate the utility of these stories for computational work. We discover clear sentiment, topic and persona-based patterns that both model the expected narrative event sequences of birth stories and highlight diverging pathways and exceptions to narrative norms. The authors' motivation to publicly post these personal stories can be a way to regain power after a surveilled and disempowering experience, and we explore power relationships between the personas in the stories, showing that these dynamics can vary with the type of birth (e.g., medicated vs unmedicated). Finally, birth stories exist in a space that is both public and deeply personal. This liminality poses a challenge for analysis and presentation, and we discuss tradeoffs and ethical practices for this collection. WARNING: This paper includes detailed narratives of pregnancy and birth.

This paper describes a qualitative study with 89 participants that details how abusers in intimate partner violence (IPV) contexts exploit technologies to intimidate, threaten, monitor, impersonate, harass, or otherwise harm their victims. We show that, at their core, many of the attacks in IPV contexts are technologically unsophisticated from the perspective of a security practitioner or researcher. For example, they are often carried out by a UI-bound adversary - an adversarial but authenticated user that interacts with a victim»s device or account via standard user interfaces - or by downloading and installing a ready-made application that enables spying on a victim. Nevertheless, we show how the sociotechnical and relational factors that characterize IPV make such attacks both extremely damaging to victims and challenging to counteract, in part because they undermine the predominant threat models under which systems have been designed. We discuss the nature of these new IPV threat models and outline opportunities for HCI research and design to mitigate these attacks.

Survivors of intimate partner violence increasingly report that abusers install spyware on devices to track their location, monitor communications, and cause emotional and physical harm. To date there has been only cursory investigation into the spyware used in such intimate partner surveillance (IPS). We provide the first in-depth study of the IPS spyware ecosystem. We design, implement, and evaluate a measurement pipeline that combines web and app store crawling with machine learning to find and label apps that are potentially dangerous in IPS contexts. Ultimately we identify several hundred such IPS-relevant apps. While we find dozens of overt spyware tools, the majority are "dual-use" apps - they have a legitimate purpose (e.g., child safety or anti-theft), but are easily and effectively repurposed for spying on a partner. We document that a wealth of online resources are available to educate abusers about exploiting apps for IPS. We also show how some dual-use app developers are encouraging their use in IPS via advertisements, blogs, and customer support services. We analyze existing anti-virus and anti-spyware tools, which universally fail to identify dual-use apps as a threat.

Designing technical systems to be resistant to bias and discrimination represents vital new terrain for researchers, policymakers, and the anti-discrimination project more broadly. We consider bias and discrimination in the context of popular online dating and hookup platforms in the United States, which we call intimate platforms. Drawing on work in social-justice-oriented and Queer HCI, we review design features of popular intimate platforms and their potential role in exacerbating or mitigating interpersonal bias. We argue that focusing on platform design can reveal opportunities to reshape troubling patterns of intimate contact without overriding users' decisional autonomy. We identify and address the difficult ethical questions that nevertheless come along with such intervention, while urging the social computing community to engage more deeply with issues of bias, discrimination, and exclusion in the study and design of intimate platforms.

Digital technologies, including mobile devices, cloud computing services, and social networks, play a nuanced role in intimate partner violence (IPV) settings, including domestic abuse, stalking, and surveillance of victims by abusive partners. However, the interactions among victims of IPV, abusers, law enforcement, counselors, and others --- and the roles that digital technologies play in these interactions --- are poorly understood. We present a qualitative study that analyzes the role of digital technologies in the IPV ecosystem in New York City. Findings from semi-structured interviews with 40 IPV professionals and nine focus groups with 32 survivors of IPV reveal a complex set of socio-technical challenges that stem from the intimate nature of the relationships involved and the complexities of managing shared social circles. Both IPV professionals and survivors feel that they do not possess adequate expertise to be able to identify or cope with technology-enabled IPV, and there are currently insufficient best practices to help them deal with abuse via technology. We also reveal a number of tensions and trade-offs in negotiating technology's role in social support and legal procedures. Taken together, our findings contribute a nuanced understanding of technology's role in the IPV ecosystem and yield recommendations for HCI and technology experts interested in aiding victims of abuse.