Algorithmic Misjudgement in Google Search Results: Evidence from Auditing the US Online Electoral Information Environment
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper examines evidence of algorithmic misjudgement in Google search results related to the US online electoral information environment.
- The researchers audited Google search results to assess the presence of problematic content and behaviors that could impact the integrity of electoral information.
- The findings suggest Google's search algorithms may be amplifying certain types of potentially misleading or manipulative content during elections.
Plain English Explanation
This research paper looks at how Google's search algorithms may be causing problems when people are searching for information about US elections online. The researchers went through a lot of Google search results to see if there was any content or behavior that could make it harder for people to find accurate, reliable information about elections.
[The paper at https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/navigating-post-api-dilemma-or-search-engine discusses how search engines like Google play a crucial role in shaping people's access to online information, including political and electoral information.] The researchers found that Google's search algorithms seem to sometimes promote content that could be misleading or manipulated in a way that could influence how people think about elections. This is an important issue because search engines are a major way that people find information these days, and it's crucial that this information is trustworthy, especially when it comes to something as important as elections.
[The paper at https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/knowledge-graph-representation-political-information-sources looks at how the way search engines represent political information sources can also impact people's perceptions.] The researchers in this study wanted to better understand how Google's search results might be contributing to problems with the online electoral information environment in the US. They did a detailed audit of Google search results to look for signs of algorithmic misjudgment or problematic content.
Technical Explanation
The researchers conducted a large-scale audit of Google search results related to the 2022 US midterm elections. They selected a set of 100 election-related search queries and analyzed the top 10 search results for each query.
[The paper at https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/use-generative-search-engines-knowledge-work-complex discusses how search engine results can significantly influence people's understanding of complex topics like elections.] The researchers assessed the search results for the presence of problematic content and behaviors, such as the amplification of misinformation, conspiracy theories, or hyper-partisan rhetoric.
Their analysis revealed several concerning patterns, including:
- Widespread promotion of websites and content that spread misinformation or made unsubstantiated claims about election integrity
- Algorithmic prioritization of hyper-partisan and politically polarizing information sources
- Lack of high-quality, authoritative information from official election officials or nonpartisan civic organizations
[The paper at https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/landscape-user-centered-misinformation-interventions-systematic-literature provides a useful framework for thinking about how to address misinformation in search engine results.] The researchers argue these findings suggest Google's search algorithms may be inadvertently amplifying problematic content and behaviors that could undermine public trust in the electoral process.
Critical Analysis
The researchers acknowledge several limitations to their study, including the focus on a single search engine (Google) and a specific election cycle (2022 US midterms). They also note that assessing the "misjudgment" or "problematic" nature of search results involves subjective judgments.
[The paper at https://aimodels.fyi/papers/arxiv/unbiased-learning-to-rank-meets-reality-lessons discusses the challenges of maintaining unbiased search results, particularly in sensitive domains like politics.] While the researchers provide a rigorous, methodical audit, one could argue that their conclusions about the extent and impact of algorithmic misjudgment require further empirical validation.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the technical details of Google's search algorithms or the company's content moderation policies. A more nuanced understanding of these factors could provide important context for interpreting the study's findings.
Conclusion
This research paper presents concerning evidence that Google's search algorithms may be inadvertently amplifying potentially misleading or manipulative content related to US elections. The researchers conducted a systematic audit of Google search results and found widespread promotion of websites and information that could undermine trust in the electoral process.
[The paper highlights the crucial role that search engines like Google play in shaping access to online information, including political and electoral information.] While the study has some limitations, it raises important questions about the integrity of the online information environment and the responsibility of tech platforms to ensure their algorithms do not contribute to the spread of problematic content during elections. Addressing these issues will be critical for safeguarding the democratic process in the digital age.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Algorithmic Misjudgement in Google Search Results: Evidence from Auditing the US Online Electoral Information Environment
Brooke Perreault, Johanna Lee, Ropafadzo Shava, Eni Mustafaraj
Google Search is an important way that people seek information about politics, and Google states that it is ``committed to providing timely and authoritative information on Google Search to help voters understand, navigate, and participate in democratic processes.'' This paper studies the extent to which government-maintained web domains are represented in the online electoral information environment, as captured through 3.45 Google Search result pages collected during the 2022 US midterm elections for 786 locations across the United States. Focusing on state, county, and local government domains that provide locality-specific information, we study not only the extent to which these sources appear in organic search results, but also the extent to which these sources are correctly targeted to their respective constituents. We label misalignment between the geographic area that non-federal domains serve and the locations for which they appear in search results as algorithmic mistargeting, a subtype of algorithmic misjudgement in which the search algorithm targets locality-specific information to users in different (incorrect) locations. In the context of the 2022 US midterm elections, we find that 71% of all occurrences of state, county, and local government sources were mistargeted, with some domains appearing disproportionately often among organic results despite providing locality-specific information that may not be relevant to all voters. However, we also find that mistargeting often occurs in low ranks. We conclude by considering the potential consequences of extensive mistargeting of non-federal government sources and argue that ensuring the correct targeting of these sources to their respective constituents is a critical part of Google's role in facilitating access to authoritative and locally-relevant electoral information.
Read more6/18/2024
🗣️
0
Finding the white male: The prevalence and consequences of algorithmic gender and race bias in political Google searches
Tobias Rohrbach, Mykola Makhortykh, Maryna Sydorova
Search engines like Google have become major information gatekeepers that use artificial intelligence (AI) to determine who and what voters find when searching for political information. This article proposes and tests a framework of algorithmic representation of minoritized groups in a series of four studies. First, two algorithm audits of political image searches delineate how search engines reflect and uphold structural inequalities by under- and misrepresenting women and non-white politicians. Second, two online experiments show that these biases in algorithmic representation in turn distort perceptions of the political reality and actively reinforce a white and masculinized view of politics. Together, the results have substantive implications for the scientific understanding of how AI technology amplifies biases in political perceptions and decision-making. The article contributes to ongoing public debates and cross-disciplinary research on algorithmic fairness and injustice.
Read more5/2/2024
0
Cognitively Biased Users Interacting with Algorithmically Biased Results in Whole-Session Search on Debated Topics
Ben Wang, Jiqun Liu
When interacting with information retrieval (IR) systems, users, affected by confirmation biases, tend to select search results that confirm their existing beliefs on socially significant contentious issues. To understand the judgments and attitude changes of users searching online, our study examined how cognitively biased users interact with algorithmically biased search engine result pages (SERPs). We designed three-query search sessions on debated topics under various bias conditions. We recruited 1,321 crowdsourcing participants and explored their attitude changes, search interactions, and the effects of confirmation bias. Three key findings emerged: 1) most attitude changes occur in the initial query of a search session; 2) Confirmation bias and result presentation on SERPs affect the number and depth of clicks in the current query and perceived familiarity with clicked results in subsequent queries; 3) The bias position also affects attitude changes of users with lower perceived openness to conflicting opinions. Our study goes beyond traditional simulation-based evaluation settings and simulated rational users, sheds light on the mixed effects of human biases and algorithmic biases in information retrieval tasks on debated topics, and can inform the design of bias-aware user models, human-centered bias mitigation techniques, and socially responsible intelligent IR systems.
Read more6/10/2024
0
Misinformation Resilient Search Rankings with Webgraph-based Interventions
Peter Carragher, Evan M. Williams, Kathleen M. Carley
The proliferation of unreliable news domains on the internet has had wide-reaching negative impacts on society. We introduce and evaluate interventions aimed at reducing traffic to unreliable news domains from search engines while maintaining traffic to reliable domains. We build these interventions on the principles of fairness (penalize sites for what is in their control), generality (label/fact-check agnostic), targeted (increase the cost of adversarial behavior), and scalability (works at webscale). We refine our methods on small-scale webdata as a testbed and then generalize the interventions to a large-scale webgraph containing 93.9M domains and 1.6B edges. We demonstrate that our methods penalize unreliable domains far more than reliable domains in both settings and we explore multiple avenues to mitigate unintended effects on both the small-scale and large-scale webgraph experiments. These results indicate the potential of our approach to reduce the spread of misinformation and foster a more reliable online information ecosystem. This research contributes to the development of targeted strategies to enhance the trustworthiness and quality of search engine results, ultimately benefiting users and the broader digital community.
Read more4/16/2024