A Sociotechnical Lens for Evaluating Computer Vision Models: A Case Study on Detecting and Reasoning about Gender and Emotion

In the evolving landscape of computer vision (CV) technologies, the automatic detection and interpretation of gender and emotion in images is a critical area of study. This paper investigates social biases in CV models, emphasizing the limitations of traditional evaluation metrics such as precision, recall, and accuracy. These metrics often fall short in capturing the complexities of gender and emotion, which are fluid and culturally nuanced constructs. Our study proposes a sociotechnical framework for evaluating CV models, incorporating both technical performance measures and considerations of social fairness. Using a dataset of 5,570 images related to vaccination and climate change, we empirically compared the performance of various CV models, including traditional models like DeepFace and FER, and generative models like GPT-4 Vision. Our analysis involved manually validating the gender and emotional expressions in a subset of images to serve as benchmarks. Our findings reveal that while GPT-4 Vision outperforms other models in technical accuracy for gender classification, it exhibits discriminatory biases, particularly in response to transgender and non-binary personas. Furthermore, the model's emotion detection skew heavily towards positive emotions, with a notable bias towards associating female images with happiness, especially when prompted by male personas. These findings underscore the necessity of developing more comprehensive evaluation criteria that address both validity and discriminatory biases in CV models. Our proposed framework provides guidelines for researchers to critically assess CV tools, ensuring their application in communication research is both ethical and effective. The significant contribution of this study lies in its emphasis on a sociotechnical approach, advocating for CV technologies that support social good and mitigate biases rather than perpetuate them.

Constructing Vec-tionaries to Extract Latent Message Features from Texts: A Case Study of Moral Appeals

While communication research frequently studies latent message features like moral appeals, their quantification remains a challenge. Conventional human coding struggles with scalability and intercoder reliability. While dictionary-based methods are cost-effective and computationally efficient, they often lack contextual sensitivity and are limited by the vocabularies developed for the original applications. In this paper, we present a novel approach to construct vec-tionary measurement tools that boost validated dictionaries with word embeddings through nonlinear optimization. By harnessing semantic relationships encoded by embeddings, vec-tionaries improve the measurement of latent message features by expanding the applicability of original vocabularies to other contexts. Vec-tionaries can also help extract semantic information from texts, especially those in short format, beyond the original vocabulary of a dictionary. Importantly, a vec-tionary can produce additional metrics to capture the valence and ambivalence of a latent feature beyond its strength in texts. Using moral appeals in COVID-19-related tweets as a case study, we illustrate the steps to construct the moral foundations vec-tionary, showcasing its ability to process posts missed by dictionary methods and to produce measurements better aligned with crowdsourced human assessments. Furthermore, additional metrics from the moral foundations vec-tionary unveiled unique insights that facilitated predicting outcomes such as message retransmission.

A critical appraisal of equity in conversational AI: Evidence from auditing GPT-3's dialogues with different publics on climate change and Black Lives Matter

Autoregressive language models, which use deep learning to produce human-like texts, have become increasingly widespread. Such models are powering popular virtual assistants in areas like smart health, finance, and autonomous driving. While the parameters of these large language models are improving, concerns persist that these models might not work equally for all subgroups in society. Despite growing discussions of AI fairness across disciplines, there lacks systemic metrics to assess what equity means in dialogue systems and how to engage different populations in the assessment loop. Grounded in theories of deliberative democracy and science and technology studies, this paper proposes an analytical framework for unpacking the meaning of equity in human-AI dialogues. Using this framework, we conducted an auditing study to examine how GPT-3 responded to different sub-populations on crucial science and social topics: climate change and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Our corpus consists of over 20,000 rounds of dialogues between GPT-3 and 3290 individuals who vary in gender, race and ethnicity, education level, English as a first language, and opinions toward the issues. We found a substantively worse user experience with GPT-3 among the opinion and the education minority subpopulations; however, these two groups achieved the largest knowledge gain, changing attitudes toward supporting BLM and climate change efforts after the chat. We traced these user experience divides to conversational differences and found that GPT-3 used more negative expressions when it responded to the education and opinion minority groups, compared to its responses to the majority groups. We discuss the implications of our findings for a deliberative conversational AI system that centralizes diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Visual Framing of Science Conspiracy Videos: Integrating Machine Learning with Communication Theories to Study the Use of Color and Brightness

Recent years have witnessed an explosion of science conspiracy videos on the Internet, challenging science epistemology and public understanding of science. Scholars have started to examine the persuasion techniques used in conspiracy messages such as uncertainty and fear yet, little is understood about the visual narratives, especially how visual narratives differ in videos that debunk conspiracies versus those that propagate conspiracies. This paper addresses this gap in understanding visual framing in conspiracy videos through analyzing millions of frames from conspiracy and counter-conspiracy YouTube videos using computational methods. We found that conspiracy videos tended to use lower color variance and brightness, especially in thumbnails and earlier parts of the videos. This paper also demonstrates how researchers can integrate textual and visual features for identifying conspiracies on social media and discusses the implications of computational modeling for scholars interested in studying visual manipulation in the digital era.