-
Social Scientists on the Role of AI in Research
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Xinyu Wang,
Pranav Narayanan Venkit,
Sai Koneru,
Kevin Munger,
Sarah Rajtmajer
Abstract:
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into social science research practices raises significant technological, methodological, and ethical issues. We present a community-centric study drawing on 284 survey responses and 15 semi-structured interviews with social scientists, describing their familiarity with, perceptions of the usefulness of, and ethical concerns about the use of AI in the…
▽ More
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into social science research practices raises significant technological, methodological, and ethical issues. We present a community-centric study drawing on 284 survey responses and 15 semi-structured interviews with social scientists, describing their familiarity with, perceptions of the usefulness of, and ethical concerns about the use of AI in their field. A crucial innovation in study design is to split our survey sample in half, providing the same questions to each -- but randomizing whether participants were asked about "AI" or "Machine Learning" (ML). We find that the use of AI in research settings has increased significantly among social scientists in step with the widespread popularity of generative AI (genAI). These tools have been used for a range of tasks, from summarizing literature reviews to drafting research papers. Some respondents used these tools out of curiosity but were dissatisfied with the results, while others have now integrated them into their typical workflows. Participants, however, also reported concerns with the use of AI in research contexts. This is a departure from more traditional ML algorithms which they view as statistically grounded. Participants express greater trust in ML, citing its relative transparency compared to black-box genAI systems. Ethical concerns, particularly around automation bias, deskilling, research misconduct, complex interpretability, and representational harm, are raised in relation to genAI. To guide this transition, we offer recommendations for AI developers, researchers, educators, and policymakers focusing on explainability, transparency, ethical safeguards, sustainability, and the integration of lived experiences into AI design and evaluation processes.
△ Less
Submitted 12 June, 2025;
originally announced June 2025.
-
Open Science Practices by Early Career HCI Researchers: Perceptions, Challenges, and Benefits
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Sanjana Gautam,
Priya Silverstein,
Sarah M. Rajtmajer
Abstract:
Many fields of science, including Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), have heightened introspection in the wake of concerns around reproducibility and replicability of published findings. Notably, in recent years the HCI community has worked to implement policy changes and mainstream open science practices. Our work investigates early-career HCI researchers' perceptions of open science and engagemen…
▽ More
Many fields of science, including Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), have heightened introspection in the wake of concerns around reproducibility and replicability of published findings. Notably, in recent years the HCI community has worked to implement policy changes and mainstream open science practices. Our work investigates early-career HCI researchers' perceptions of open science and engagement with best practices through 18 semi-structured interviews. Our findings highlight key barriers to the widespread adoption of data and materials sharing, and preregistration, namely: lack of clear incentives; cultural resistance; limited training; time constraints; concerns about intellectual property; and data privacy issues. We observe that small changes at major conferences like CHI could meaningfully impact community norms. We offer recommendations to address these barriers and to promote transparency and openness in HCI.
△ Less
Submitted 5 October, 2024;
originally announced October 2024.
-
An Audit on the Perspectives and Challenges of Hallucinations in NLP
Authors:
Pranav Narayanan Venkit,
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Vipul Gupta,
Heidi Biggs,
Mukund Srinath,
Koustava Goswami,
Sarah Rajtmajer,
Shomir Wilson
Abstract:
We audit how hallucination in large language models (LLMs) is characterized in peer-reviewed literature, using a critical examination of 103 publications across NLP research. Through the examination of the literature, we identify a lack of agreement with the term `hallucination' in the field of NLP. Additionally, to compliment our audit, we conduct a survey with 171 practitioners from the field of…
▽ More
We audit how hallucination in large language models (LLMs) is characterized in peer-reviewed literature, using a critical examination of 103 publications across NLP research. Through the examination of the literature, we identify a lack of agreement with the term `hallucination' in the field of NLP. Additionally, to compliment our audit, we conduct a survey with 171 practitioners from the field of NLP and AI to capture varying perspectives on hallucination. Our analysis calls for the necessity of explicit definitions and frameworks outlining hallucination within NLP, highlighting potential challenges, and our survey inputs provide a thematic understanding of the influence and ramifications of hallucination in society.
△ Less
Submitted 13 September, 2024; v1 submitted 10 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Reproducibility, Replicability, and Transparency in Research: What 430 Professors Think in Universities across the USA and India
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Sai Dileep Koneru,
Sarah Rajtmajer
Abstract:
In the past decade, open science and science of science communities have initiated innovative efforts to address concerns about the reproducibility and replicability of published scientific research. In some respects, these efforts have been successful, yet there are still many pockets of researchers with little to no familiarity with these concerns, subsequent responses, or best practices for eng…
▽ More
In the past decade, open science and science of science communities have initiated innovative efforts to address concerns about the reproducibility and replicability of published scientific research. In some respects, these efforts have been successful, yet there are still many pockets of researchers with little to no familiarity with these concerns, subsequent responses, or best practices for engaging in reproducible, replicable, and reliable scholarship. In this work, we survey 430 professors from Universities across the USA and India to understand perspectives on scientific processes and identify key points for intervention. Our findings reveal both national and disciplinary gaps in attention to reproducibility and replicability, aggravated by incentive misalignment and resource constraints. We suggest that solutions addressing scientific integrity should be culturally-centered, where definitions of culture should include both regional and domain-specific elements.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Integrating measures of replicability into scholarly search: Challenges and opportunities
Authors:
Chuhao Wu,
Tatiana Chakravorti,
John Carroll,
Sarah Rajtmajer
Abstract:
Challenges to reproducibility and replicability have gained widespread attention, driven by large replication projects with lukewarm success rates. A nascent work has emerged developing algorithms to estimate the replicability of published findings. The current study explores ways in which AI-enabled signals of confidence in research might be integrated into the literature search. We interview 17…
▽ More
Challenges to reproducibility and replicability have gained widespread attention, driven by large replication projects with lukewarm success rates. A nascent work has emerged developing algorithms to estimate the replicability of published findings. The current study explores ways in which AI-enabled signals of confidence in research might be integrated into the literature search. We interview 17 PhD researchers about their current processes for literature search and ask them to provide feedback on a replicability estimation tool. Our findings suggest that participants tend to confuse replicability with generalizability and related concepts. Information about replicability can support researchers throughout the research design processes. However, the use of AI estimation is debatable due to the lack of explainability and transparency. The ethical implications of AI-enabled confidence assessment must be further studied before such tools could be widely accepted. We discuss implications for the design of technological tools to support scholarly activities and advance replicability.
△ Less
Submitted 3 May, 2024; v1 submitted 1 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
Perspectives from India: Opportunities and Challenges for AI Replication Prediction to Improve Confidence in Published Research
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Chuhao Wu,
Sai Koneru,
Sarah Rajtmajer
Abstract:
Over the past decade, a crisis of confidence in scientific literature has gained attention, particularly in the West. In response, we have seen changes in policy and practice amongst individual researchers and institutions. Greater attention is given to the transparency of workflows and the appropriate use of statistical methods. Advances in scholarly big data and machine learning have led to the…
▽ More
Over the past decade, a crisis of confidence in scientific literature has gained attention, particularly in the West. In response, we have seen changes in policy and practice amongst individual researchers and institutions. Greater attention is given to the transparency of workflows and the appropriate use of statistical methods. Advances in scholarly big data and machine learning have led to the development of AI-driven tools for the evaluation of published findings. In this study, we conduct 19 semi-structured interviews with Indian researchers to understand their perspectives on challenges and opportunities for AI technologies to improve confidence in published research. Our findings highlight the importance of social and cultural context for the design and deployment of AI tools for research assessment. Our work suggests that such technologies must work alongside rather than replace human research assessment mechanisms. They must be explainable and situated within well-functioning human-centered peer review processes.
△ Less
Submitted 15 September, 2024; v1 submitted 29 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
A prototype hybrid prediction market for estimating replicability of published work
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Robert Fraleigh,
Timothy Fritton,
Michael McLaughlin,
Vaibhav Singh,
Christopher Griffin,
Anthony Kwasnica,
David Pennock,
C. Lee Giles,
Sarah Rajtmajer
Abstract:
We present a prototype hybrid prediction market and demonstrate the avenue it represents for meaningful human-AI collaboration. We build on prior work proposing artificial prediction markets as a novel machine-learning algorithm. In an artificial prediction market, trained AI agents buy and sell outcomes of future events. Classification decisions can be framed as outcomes of future events, and acc…
▽ More
We present a prototype hybrid prediction market and demonstrate the avenue it represents for meaningful human-AI collaboration. We build on prior work proposing artificial prediction markets as a novel machine-learning algorithm. In an artificial prediction market, trained AI agents buy and sell outcomes of future events. Classification decisions can be framed as outcomes of future events, and accordingly, the price of an asset corresponding to a given classification outcome can be taken as a proxy for the confidence of the system in that decision. By embedding human participants in these markets alongside bot traders, we can bring together insights from both. In this paper, we detail pilot studies with prototype hybrid markets for the prediction of replication study outcomes. We highlight challenges and opportunities, share insights from semi-structured interviews with hybrid market participants, and outline a vision for ongoing and future work.
△ Less
Submitted 1 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
Artificial prediction markets present a novel opportunity for human-AI collaboration
Authors:
Tatiana Chakravorti,
Vaibhav Singh,
Sarah Rajtmajer,
Michael McLaughlin,
Robert Fraleigh,
Christopher Griffin,
Anthony Kwasnica,
David Pennock,
C. Lee Giles
Abstract:
Despite high-profile successes in the field of Artificial Intelligence, machine-driven technologies still suffer important limitations, particularly for complex tasks where creativity, planning, common sense, intuition, or learning from limited data is required. These limitations motivate effective methods for human-machine collaboration. Our work makes two primary contributions. We thoroughly exp…
▽ More
Despite high-profile successes in the field of Artificial Intelligence, machine-driven technologies still suffer important limitations, particularly for complex tasks where creativity, planning, common sense, intuition, or learning from limited data is required. These limitations motivate effective methods for human-machine collaboration. Our work makes two primary contributions. We thoroughly experiment with an artificial prediction market model to understand the effects of market parameters on model performance for benchmark classification tasks. We then demonstrate, through simulation, the impact of exogenous agents in the market, where these exogenous agents represent primitive human behaviors. This work lays the foundation for a novel set of hybrid human-AI machine learning algorithms.
△ Less
Submitted 29 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.