When Are Search Completion Suggestions Problematic?

被引:20
作者
Olteanu A. [1 ]
Diaz F. [2 ]
Kazai G. [3 ]
机构
[1] Microsoft, New York, NY
[2] Microsoft, Montreal
[3] Microsoft, Cambridge
关键词
predictive text; problematic suggestions; query logs; web search suggestions;
D O I
10.1145/3415242
中图分类号
G252.7 [文献检索]; G354 [情报检索];
学科分类号
摘要
Problematic web search query completion suggestions-perceived as biased, offensive, or in some other way harmful-can reinforce existing stereotypes and misbeliefs, and even nudge users towards undesirable patterns of behavior. Locating such suggestions is difficult, not only due to the long-tailed nature of web search, but also due to differences in how people assess potential harms. Grounding our study in web search query logs, we explore when system-provided suggestions might be perceived as problematic through a series of crowd-experiments where we systematically manipulate: the search query fragments provided by users, possible user search intents, and the list of query completion suggestions. To examine why query suggestions might be perceived as problematic, we contrast them to an inventory of known types of problematic suggestions. We report our observations around differences in the prevalence of a) suggestions that are problematic on their own versus b) suggestions that are problematic for the query fragment provided by a user, for both common informational needs and in the presence of web search voids-topics searched by few to no users. Our experiments surface a rich array of scenarios where suggestions are considered problematic, including due to the context in which they were surfaced. Compounded by the elusive nature of many such scenarios, the prevalence of suggestions perceived as problematic only for certain user inputs, raises concerns about blind spots due to data annotation practices that may lead to some types of problematic suggestions being overlooked. © 2020 ACM.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 89 条
[31]  
Hoffman C., Bing Is Suggesting the Worst Things You Can Imagine, (2018)
[32]  
Hu D., Jiang S., Robertson R.E., Wilson C., Auditing the partisanship of google search snippets, Positions, 16, 57, (2019)
[33]  
Jain A., Pennacchiotti M., Open entity extraction from web search query logs, Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 510-518, (2010)
[34]  
Kamvar M., Kellar M., Patel R., Xu Y., Computers and iphones and mobile phones, oh my! A logs-based comparison of search users on different devices, Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW '09), pp. 801-810, (2009)
[35]  
Kannan A., Young P., Ramavajjala V., Kurach K., Ravi S., Kaufmann T., Tomkins A., Miklos B., Corrado G., Lukacs L., Ganea M., Smart reply: Automated response suggestion for email, Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining-KDD '16, pp. 955-964, (2016)
[36]  
Karapapa S., Borghi M., Search engine liability for autocomplete suggestions: Personality, privacy and the power of the algorithm, International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 23, 3, pp. 261-289, (2015)
[37]  
Keane M.T., O'Brien M., Smyth B., Are people biased in their use of search engines?, Commun. ACM, 51, 2, pp. 49-52, (2008)
[38]  
Kharitonov E., Macdonald C., Serdyukov P., Ounis I., User model-based metrics for offline query suggestion evaluation, Proceedings of the 36th International ACMSIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '13), pp. 633-642, (2013)
[39]  
KhudaBukhsh A.R., Bennett P.N., White R.W., Building effective query classifiers: A case study in self-harm intent detection, Proceedings of the 24th ACM International on Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '15), pp. 1735-1738, (2015)
[40]  
Kirk C., The Most Popular Swear Words on Facebook, (2013)