Lower Quantity, Higher Quality: Auditing News Content and User Perceptions on Twitter/X Algorithmic versus Chronological Timelines

June 24, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Stephanie Wang, Shengchun Huang, Alvin Zhou, DanaΓ« Metaxa arXiv ID 2406.17097 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Citations 14 Venue Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Social media personalization algorithms increasingly influence the flow of civic information through society, resulting in concerns about "filter bubbles", "echo chambers", and other ways they might exacerbate ideological segregation and fan the spread of polarizing content. To address these concerns, we designed and conducted a sociotechnical audit (STA) to investigate how Twitter/X's timeline algorithm affects news curation while also tracking how user perceptions change in response. We deployed a custom-built system that, over the course of three weeks, passively tracked all tweets loaded in users' browsers in the first week, then in the second week enacted an intervention to users' Twitter/X homepage to restrict their view to only the algorithmic or chronological timeline (randomized). We flipped this condition for each user in the third week. We ran our audit in late 2023, collecting user-centered metrics (self-reported survey measures) and platform-centered metrics (views, clicks, likes) for 243 users, along with over 800,000 tweets. Using the STA framework, our results are two-fold: (1) Our algorithm audit finds that Twitter/X's algorithmic timeline resulted in a lower quantity but higher quality of news -- less ideologically congruent, less extreme, and slightly more reliable -- compared to the chronological timeline. (2) Our user audit suggests that although our timeline intervention had significant effects on users' behaviors, it had little impact on their overall perceptions of the platform. Our paper discusses these findings and their broader implications in the context of algorithmic news curation, user-centric audits, and avenues for independent social science research.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted