Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3613905.3636309acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Forms of Fraudulence in Human-Centered Design: Collective Strategies and Future Agenda for Qualitative HCI Research

Published: 11 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

New technical forms of deception–including AI deepfakes and unethical uses of ChatGTP–have gained attention in the wider research community and media. There has also been an increase in the coordinated social activities of bad actors posing as legitimate human research participants. People, for example, sign up for online HCI studies by misrepresenting their identities and experiences. This workshop explores what counts as "fraud" in the rapidly changing sociotechnical landscape of qualitative HCI research sites, and how might our community better understand (and strategically handle) new forms of fraudulence in human-centered design. Researchers across academia and industry are invited to participate in this discourse, share their personal experiences, explore potential strategies to combat fraudulence and reflect critically on the efficacies and shortcomings of such strategies. Outcomes of this workshop include working towards better guidelines, forming a community of researchers to support those impacted by fraudulence, and collaboratively defining a research agenda based on workshop discussions.

References

[1]
Dilmi Aluwihare-Samaranayake. 2012. Ethics in Qualitative Research: A View of the Participants’ and Researchers’ World from a Critical Standpoint. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 11, 2 (4 2012), 64–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100208
[2]
April M Ballard, Trey Cardwell, and April M Young. 2019. Fraud Detection Protocol for Web-Based Research Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Development and Descriptive Evaluation. JMIR Public Health Surveill 5, 1 (2019), e12344. https://doi.org/10.2196/12344
[3]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2021. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide (first ed.). https://uwe-repository.worktribe.com/output/9004204
[4]
Enrico Cambiaso and Luca Caviglione. 2023. Scamming the Scammers: Using ChatGPT to Reply Mails for Wasting Time and Resources. (2 2023).
[5]
Felix Chopra and Ingar Haaland. 2023. Conducting Qualitative Interviews with AI. SSRN Electronic Journal (2023). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4583756
[6]
Jill P. Dimond, Casey Fiesler, Betsy DiSalvo, Jon Pelc, and Amy S. Bruckman. 2012. Qualitative data collection technologies. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Supporting group work. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 277–280. https://doi.org/10.1145/2389176.2389218
[7]
Jessica L. Feuston, Arpita Bhattacharya, Nazanin Andalibi, Elizabeth A. Ankrah, Sheena Erete, Mark Handel, Wendy Moncur, Sarah Vieweg, and Jed R. Brubaker. 2022. Researcher Wellbeing and Best Practices in Emotionally Demanding Research. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491101.3503742
[8]
Sarah Flicker. 2004. "Ask Me No Secrets, I’ll Tell You No Lies": What Happens When a Respondent’s Story Makes No Sense. The Qualitative Report 9 (2004), 528–537. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:142452366
[9]
Dilrukshi Gamage, Piyush Ghasiya, Vamshi Bonagiri, Mark E. Whiting, and Kazutoshi Sasahara. 2022. Are Deepfakes Concerning? Analyzing Conversations of Deepfakes on Reddit and Exploring Societal Implications. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517446
[10]
Jeffrey T. Hancock and Jeremy N. Bailenson. 2021. The Social Impact of Deepfakes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 24, 3 (3 2021), 149–152. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2021.29208.jth
[11]
Serena Hillman, Azadeh Forghani, Carolyn Pang, Carman Neustaedter, and Tejinder K. Judge. 2015. Conducting Interviews with Remote Participants. In Studying and Designing Technology for Domestic Life. Elsevier, 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800555-2.00002-2
[12]
Abigail Jones, Line Caes, Tessa Rugg, Melanie Noel, Sharon Bateman, and Abbie Jordan. 2021. Challenging issues of integrity and identity of participants in non-synchronous online qualitative methods. Methods in Psychology 5 (12 2021), 100072. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.METIP.2021.100072
[13]
Carolyn Lauckner, Natalia Truszczynski, Danielle Lambert, Varsha Kottamasu, Saher Meherally, Anne Marie Schipani-McLaughlin, Erica Taylor, and Nathan Hansen. 2019. “Catfishing,” cyberbullying, and coercion: An exploration of the risks associated with dating app use among rural sexual minority males. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health 23, 3 (7 2019), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/19359705.2019.1587729
[14]
Haley MacLeod, Ben Jelen, Annu Prabhakar, Lora Oehlberg, Katie Siek, and Kay Connelly. 2016. Asynchronous Remote Communities (ARC) for Researching Distributed Populations. In Proceedings of the 10th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare. ACM. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.16-5-2016.2263322
[15]
Wendy Moncur. 2013. The emotional wellbeing of researchers. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1883–1890. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466248
[16]
Mandi Pratt-Chapman, Jenna Moses, and Hannah Arem. 2021. Strategies for the Identification and Prevention of Survey Fraud: Data Analysis of a Web-Based Survey. JMIR Cancer 7, 3 (7 2021), e30730. https://doi.org/10.2196/30730
[17]
Damien Ridge, Laurna Bullock, Hilary Causer, Tamsin Fisher, Samantha Hider, Tom Kingstone, Lauren Gray, Ruth Riley, Nina Smyth, Victoria Silverwood, Johanna Spiers, and Jane Southam. 2023. ‘Imposter participants’ in online qualitative research, a new and increasing threat to data integrity?Health Expectations 26, 3 (6 2023), 941–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13724
[18]
Jacqueline Roehl and Darci Harland. 2022. Imposter Participants: Overcoming Methodological Challenges Related to Balancing Participant Privacy with Data Quality When Using Online Recruitment and Data Collection. The Qualitative Report (11 2022). https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5475
[19]
Margaret R. Salinas. 2023. Are Your Participants Real? Dealing with Fraud in Recruiting Older Adults Online. Western Journal of Nursing Research 45, 1 (1 2023), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/01939459221098468
[20]
Justine S. Sefcik, Zachary Hathaway, and Rose Ann DiMaria‐Ghalili. 2023. When snowball sampling leads to an avalanche of fraudulent participants in qualitative research. International Journal of Older People Nursing (8 2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/opn.12572

Index Terms

  1. Forms of Fraudulence in Human-Centered Design: Collective Strategies and Future Agenda for Qualitative HCI Research

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI EA '24: Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    May 2024
    4761 pages
    ISBN:9798400703317
    DOI:10.1145/3613905
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 11 May 2024

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. data integrity
    2. deception
    3. ethics
    4. fraudulence
    5. human research participants
    6. online studies
    7. qualitative research

    Qualifiers

    • Extended-abstract
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    CHI '24

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

    Upcoming Conference

    CHI 2025
    ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 26 - May 1, 2025
    Yokohama , Japan

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 180
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)180
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)26
    Reflects downloads up to 20 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    Full Text

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media