New contexts, old heuristics: How young people in India and the US trust online content in the age of generative AI
2405.02522
0
0
🤖
Abstract
We conducted an in-person ethnography in India and the US to investigate how young people (18-24) trusted online content, with a focus on generative AI (GenAI). We had four key findings about how young people use GenAI and determine what to trust online. First, when online, we found participants fluidly shifted between mindsets and emotional states, which we term information modes. Second, these information modes shaped how and why participants trust GenAI and how they applied literacy skills. In the modes where they spent most of their time, they eschewed literacy skills. Third, with the advent of GenAI, participants imported existing trust heuristics from familiar online contexts into their interactions with GenAI. Fourth, although study participants had reservations about GenAI, they saw it as a requisite tool to adopt to keep up with the times. Participants valued efficiency above all else, and used GenAI to further their goals quickly at the expense of accuracy. Our findings suggest that young people spend the majority of their time online not concerned with truth because they are seeking only to pass the time. As a result, literacy interventions should be designed to intervene at the right time, to match users' distinct information modes, and to work with their existing fact-checking practices.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- Researchers conducted an ethnographic study in India and the US to understand how young people (18-24) trust online content, with a focus on generative AI (GenAI).
- The study uncovered four key findings about how young people use GenAI and determine what to trust online.
Plain English Explanation
The researchers wanted to understand how young people (aged 18-24) decide what information to trust online, particularly when it comes to generative AI (like chatbots and content generators). To do this, they observed young people in India and the US as they used the internet.
The key findings were:
-
Young people often switch between different "mindsets" or "emotional states" when they're online, which the researchers call "information modes." These modes shape how they trust and use GenAI.
-
In the modes where young people spend the most time online, they tend to avoid using critical thinking skills to evaluate information. They're more focused on entertainment or efficiency than accuracy.
-
As GenAI becomes more common, young people are applying the same trust "rules" they use for other online content to these new AI tools. This means they may not be evaluating GenAI output as carefully as they should.
-
While young people have some reservations about GenAI, they see it as a necessary tool to keep up with the times. Efficiency is their top priority, even if it means sacrificing accuracy.
The researchers suggest that literacy interventions need to be designed to match young people's different information modes and work with their existing online fact-checking habits, rather than trying to change those habits entirely.
Technical Explanation
The researchers conducted an in-person ethnographic study with young people (aged 18-24) in India and the US to investigate how they determine trust in online content, with a focus on generative AI (GenAI).
They found four key insights:
-
Participants fluidly shifted between different "information modes" - distinct mindsets and emotional states - while online. These modes shaped how and why they trusted GenAI and applied their digital literacy skills.
-
In the modes where participants spent the majority of their time online, they tended to eschew critical thinking and literacy skills, prioritizing entertainment or efficiency over accuracy.
-
With the rise of GenAI, participants imported existing trust heuristics from familiar online contexts into their interactions with these new AI tools, potentially not evaluating them as rigorously.
-
While participants expressed reservations about GenAI, they saw it as a necessary tool to keep up with the times. Efficiency was their top priority, even if it meant sacrificing some accuracy.
The researchers suggest that literacy interventions should be designed to match users' distinct information modes and work with their existing fact-checking practices, rather than trying to change those habits entirely.
Critical Analysis
The researchers provide valuable insights into how young people's online behaviors and priorities shape their interactions with and trust in generative AI. By observing participants in real-world settings, the study offers a nuanced understanding of the complex factors at play.
However, the study is limited in scope, focusing only on young people in India and the US. Exploring how trust in GenAI varies across different age groups, cultures, and socioeconomic backgrounds could provide a more comprehensive picture. Additionally, the researchers acknowledge that their findings may be influenced by the specific timing of the study, as GenAI technology is rapidly evolving.
Further research could delve deeper into the practical implications of these findings, such as how to design effective literacy interventions that account for users' diverse information modes and existing trust heuristics. Exploring the potential long-term consequences of young people's GenAI usage patterns on their critical thinking skills and decision-making processes would also be a valuable area of investigation.
Conclusion
This ethnographic study provides valuable insights into how young people navigate the increasingly complex landscape of online information, particularly with the rise of generative AI. The researchers found that young people's trust in GenAI is shaped by their fluid information modes, prioritization of efficiency over accuracy, and application of existing trust heuristics.
These findings suggest that literacy interventions need to be designed with a nuanced understanding of users' online behaviors and priorities. By meeting young people where they are, rather than trying to change their habits entirely, such interventions may be more effective in helping them critically evaluate online content, including that generated by AI.
As GenAI becomes more pervasive, understanding how young people interact with and trust these tools will be crucial for ensuring they can navigate the digital world in a informed and responsible manner.
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
🤖
Children's Overtrust and Shifting Perspectives of Generative AI
Jaemarie Solyst, Ellia Yang, Shixian Xie, Jessica Hammer, Amy Ogan, Motahhare Eslami
0
0
The capabilities of generative AI (genAI) have dramatically increased in recent times, and there are opportunities for children to leverage new features for personal and school-related endeavors. However, while the future of genAI is taking form, there remain potentially harmful limitations, such as generation of outputs with misinformation and bias. We ran a workshop study focused on ChatGPT to explore middle school girls' (N = 26) attitudes and reasoning about how genAI works. We focused on girls who are often disproportionately impacted by algorithmic bias. We found that: (1) middle school girls were initially overtrusting of genAI, (2) deliberate exposure to the limitations and mistakes of generative AI shifted this overtrust to disillusionment about genAI capabilities, though they were still optimistic for future possibilities of genAI, and (3) their ideas about school policy were nuanced. This work informs how children think about genAI like ChatGPT and its integration in learning settings.
4/24/2024
🤔
Design Implications for a Social and Collaborative Understanding of online Information Assessment Practices, Challenges and Heuristics
Vasilis Vlachokyriakos, Ian G. Johnson, Robert Anderson, Caroline Claisse, Viana Zhang, Pamela Briggs
0
0
The broader adoption of social media platforms (e.g., TikTok), combined with recent developments in Generative AI (GAI) technologies has had a transformative effect on many peoples' ability to confidently assess the veracity and meaning of information online. In this paper, building on recent related work that surfaced the social ways that young people evaluate information online, we explore the decision-making practices, challenges and heuristics involved in young adults' assessments of information online. To do so, we designed and conducted a novel digital diary study, followed by data-informed interviews with young adults. Our findings uncover the information practices of young adults including the social and emotional motivations for ignoring, avoiding, and engaging with online information and the ways this is entangled with collaborative arrangements with algorithms as agents. In our discussion we bring these findings in close dialogue with work on information sensibility and contribute rich insights into young peoples' information sensibility practices embedded within social worlds. Finally, we surface how such practices are attuned to prioritise wellbeing over convenience or other commonly associated sufficing heuristics.
5/2/2024
📈
The Influencer Next Door: How Misinformation Creators Use GenAI
Amelia Hassoun, Ariel Abonizio, Katy Osborn, Cameron Wu, Beth Goldberg
0
0
Advances in generative AI (GenAI) have raised concerns about detecting and discerning AI-generated content from human-generated content. Most existing literature assumes a paradigm where 'expert' organized disinformation creators and flawed AI models deceive 'ordinary' users. Based on longitudinal ethnographic research with misinformation creators and consumers between 2022-2023, we instead find that GenAI supports bricolage work, where non-experts increasingly use GenAI to remix, repackage, and (re)produce content to meet their personal needs and desires. This research yielded four key findings: First, participants primarily used GenAI for creation, rather than truth-seeking. Second, a spreading 'influencer millionaire' narrative drove participants to become content creators, using GenAI as a productivity tool to generate a volume of (often misinformative) content. Third, GenAI lowered the barrier to entry for content creation across modalities, enticing consumers to become creators and significantly increasing existing creators' output. Finally, participants used Gen AI to learn and deploy marketing tactics to expand engagement and monetize their content. We argue for shifting analysis from the public as consumers of AI content to bricoleurs who use GenAI creatively, often without a detailed understanding of its underlying technology. We analyze how these understudied emergent uses of GenAI produce new or accelerated misinformation harms, and their implications for AI products, platforms and policies.
6/19/2024
🤖
Children's Mental Models of Generative Visual and Text Based AI Models
Eliza Kosoy, Soojin Jeong, Anoop Sinha, Alison Gopnik, Tanya Kraljic
0
0
In this work we investigate how children ages 5-12 perceive, understand, and use generative AI models such as a text-based LLMs ChatGPT and a visual-based model DALL-E. Generative AI is newly being used widely since chatGPT. Children are also building mental models of generative AI. Those haven't been studied before and it is also the case that the children's models are dynamic as they use the tools, even with just very short usage. Upon surveying and experimentally observing over 40 children ages 5-12, we found that children generally have a very positive outlook towards AI and are excited about the ways AI may benefit and aid them in their everyday lives. In a forced choice, children robustly associated AI with positive adjectives versus negative ones. We also categorize what children are querying AI models for and find that children search for more imaginative things that don't exist when using a visual-based AI and not when using a text-based one. Our follow-up study monitored children's responses and feelings towards AI before and after interacting with GenAI models. We even find that children find AI to be less scary after interacting with it. We hope that these findings will shine a light on children's mental models of AI and provide insight for how to design the best possible tools for children who will inevitably be using AI in their lifetimes. The motivation of this work is to bridge the gap between Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Psychology in an effort to study the effects of AI on society. We aim to identify the gaps in humans' mental models of what AI is and how it works. Previous work has investigated how both adults and children perceive various kinds of robots, computers, and other technological concepts. However, there is very little work investigating these concepts for generative AI models and not simply embodied robots or physical technology.
5/24/2024