Computers as Bad Social Actors: Dark Patterns and Anti-Patterns in Interfaces that Act Socially
February 09, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Lize Alberts, Ulrik Lyngs, Max Van Kleek
arXiv ID
2302.04720
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Citations
41
Venue
Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact.
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Technologies increasingly mimic human-like social behaviours. Beyond prototypical conversational agents like chatbots, this also applies to basic automated systems like app notifications or self-checkout machines that address or 'talk to' users in everyday situations. Whilst early evidence suggests social cues may enhance user experience, we lack a good understanding of when, and why, their use may be inappropriate. Building on a survey of English-speaking smartphone users (n=80), we conducted experience sampling, interview, and workshop studies (n=11) to elicit people's attitudes and preferences regarding how automated systems talk to them. We thematically analysed examples of phrasings/conduct participants disliked, the reasons they gave, and what they would prefer instead. One category of inappropriate behaviour we identified regards the use of social cues as tools for manipulation. We describe four unwanted tactics interfaces use: agents playing on users' emotions (e.g., guilt-tripping or coaxing them), being pushy, `mothering' users, or being passive-aggressive. Another category regards pragmatics: personal or situational factors that can make a seemingly friendly or helpful utterance come across as rude, tactless, or invasive. These include failing to account for relevant contextual particulars (e.g., embarrassing users in public); expressing obviously false personalised care; or treating a user in ways that they find inappropriate for the system's role or the nature of their relationship. We discuss these behaviours in terms of an emerging 'social' class of dark and anti-patterns. Drawing from participant recommendations, we offer suggestions for improving how interfaces treat people in interactions, including broader normative reflections on treating users respectfully.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted