Despite their increasing capabilities, text-to-image generative AI systems are known to produce biased, offensive, and otherwise problematic outputs. While recent advancements have supported testing and auditing of generative AI, existing auditing methods still face challenges in supporting effectively explore the vast space of AI-generated outputs in a structured way. To address this gap, we conducted formative studies with five AI auditors and synthesized five design goals for supporting systematic AI audits. Based on these insights, we developed Vipera, an interactive auditing interface that employs multiple visual cues including a scene graph to facilitate image sensemaking and inspire auditors to explore and hierarchically organize the auditing criteria. Additionally, Vipera leverages LLM-powered suggestions to facilitate exploration of unexplored auditing directions. Through a controlled experiment with 24 participants experienced in AI auditing, we demonstrate Vipera's effectiveness in helping auditors navigate large AI output spaces and organize their analyses while engaging with diverse criteria.

Around 90% of CEOs see AI as the “most critical technology for ensuring future profitability and competitiveness.” At the same time, up to 95% of AI projects fail. Currently, little is known about the leaders who approve and guide AI initiatives. We call them AI Deciders. This study investigates how AI Deciders reason about AI benefits and risks, and how their knowledge about AI influences their decisions on what and where to innovate. We interviewed AI Deciders across diverse organizations. We found no ideation. AI Deciders just consider one concept at a time. Design and HCI played no role in deciding what to build. Many AI Deciders overestimate AI’s benefits while underestimating risks. Based on these findings, we identified opportunities for design and HCI to support impactful and responsible AI innovation. This should reduce AI project failure.

Online interpersonal harm, such as cyberbullying and sexual harassment, remains a pervasive issue on social media platforms. Traditional approaches, primarily content moderation, often overlook survivors' needs and agency. We introduce SnuggleSense, a system that empowers survivors through structured sensemaking. Inspired by restorative justice practices, SnuggleSense guides survivors through reflective questions, offers personalized recommendations from similar survivors, and visualizes plans using interactive sticky notes. A controlled experiment demonstrates that SnuggleSense significantly enhances sensemaking compared to an unstructured process of making sense of the harm. We argue that SnuggleSense fosters community awareness, cultivates a supportive survivor network, and promotes a restorative justice-oriented approach toward restoration and healing. We also discuss design insights, such as tailoring informational support and providing guidance while preserving survivors' agency.

Most social media platforms implement content moderation to address interpersonal harms such as harassment. Content moderation relies on offender-centered, punitive approaches, e.g., bans and content removal. We consider an alternative justice framework, restorative justice, which aids victims in healing, supports offenders in repairing the harm, and engages community members in addressing the harm collectively. To assess the utility of restorative justice in addressing online harm, we interviewed 23 users from Overwatch gaming communities, including moderators, victims, and offenders; such communities are particularly susceptible to harm, with nearly three quarters of all online game players suffering from some form of online abuse. We study how the communities currently handle harm cases through the lens of restorative justice and examine their attitudes toward implementing restorative justice processes. Our analysis reveals that cultural, technical, and resource-related obstacles hinder implementation of restorative justice within the existing punitive framework despite online community needs and existing structures to support it. We discuss how current content moderation systems can embed restorative justice goals and practices and overcome these challenges.

Online harm is a prevalent issue in adolescents’ online lives. Restorative justice teaches us to focus on those who have been harmed, ask what their needs are, and engage in the offending party and community members to collectively address the harm. In this research, we conducted interviews and design activities with harmed adolescents to understand their needs to address online harm. They also identified the key stakeholders relevant to their needs, the desired outcomes, and the preferred timing to achieve them. We identified five central needs of harmed adolescents: sensemaking, emotional support and validation, safety, retribution, and transformation. We find that addressing the needs of those who are harmed online usually requires concerted efforts from multiple stakeholders online and offline. We conclude by discussing how platforms can implement design interventions to meet some of these needs.

How do people come to believe conspiracy theories, and what role does the internet play in this process as a socio-technical system? We explore these questions by examining online participants in the "chemtrails" conspiracy, the idea that visible condensation trails behind airliners are deliberately sprayed for nefarious purposes. We apply Weick's theory of sensemaking to examine the role of people's frames (beliefs and worldviews), as well as the socio-technical contexts (social interactions and technological affordances) for processing informational cues about the conspiracy. Through an analysis of in-depth interviews with thirteen believers and seven ex-believers, we find that many people become curious about chemtrails after consuming rich online media, and they later find welcoming online communities to support shared beliefs and worldviews. We discuss how the socio-technical context of the internet may inadvertently trap people in a perpetual state of ambiguity that becomes reinforced through a collective sensemaking process. In addition, we show how the conspiracy offers a way for believers to express their dissatisfaction with authority, enjoy a sense of community, and find some entertainment along the way. Finally, we discuss how people's frames and the various socio-technical contexts of the internet are important in the sensemaking of debunking evidence, and how such factors may function in the rejection of conspiratorial beliefs.

Among many young people, the creation of a finsta-a portmanteau of "fake" and "Instagram" which describes secondary Instagram accounts-provides an outlet to share emotional, low-quality, or indecorous content with their close friends. To study why people create and maintain finstas, we conducted a qualitative study through interviews with finsta users and content analysis of video bloggers exposing their finsta on YouTube. We found that one way that young people deal with mounting social pressures is by reconfiguring online platforms and changing their purposes, norms, expectations, and currencies. Carving out smaller spaces accessible only to close friends allows users the opportunity for a more unguarded, vulnerable, and unserious performance. Drawing on feminist theory, we term this process intimate reconfiguration. Through this reconfiguration finsta users repurpose an existing and widely-used social platform to create opportunities for more meaningful and reciprocal forms of social support.