4.5 Article

Artificial Intelligence and Inclusion: Formerly Gang-Involved Youth as Domain Experts for Analyzing Unstructured Twitter Data

期刊

SOCIAL SCIENCE COMPUTER REVIEW
卷 38, 期 1, 页码 42-56

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0894439318788314

关键词

social media; gang violence; domain experts; artificial intelligence; inclusion; qualitative methods; natural language processing; Big Data; ethics; law enforcement

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [L40 MH117731] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mining social media data for studying the human condition has created new and unique challenges. When analyzing social media data from marginalized communities, algorithms lack the ability to accurately interpret off-line context, which may lead to dangerous assumptions about and implications for marginalized communities. To combat this challenge, we hired formerly gang-involved young people as domain experts for contextualizing social media data in order to create inclusive, community-informed algorithms. Utilizing data from the Gang Intervention and Computer Science Project-a comprehensive analysis of Twitter data from gang-involved youth in Chicago-we describe the process of involving formerly gang-involved young people in developing a new part-of-speech tagger and content classifier for a prototype natural language processing system that detects aggression and loss in Twitter data. We argue that involving young people as domain experts leads to more robust understandings of context, including localized language, culture, and events. These insights could change how data scientists approach the development of corpora and algorithms that affect people in marginalized communities and who to involve in that process. We offer a contextually driven interdisciplinary approach between social work and data science that integrates domain insights into the training of qualitative annotators and the production of algorithms for positive social impact.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据