Anqi Shao

Kaiping Chen, Anqi Shao, Jirayu Burapacheep et al.

Autoregressive language models, which use deep learning to produce human-like texts, have become increasingly widespread. Such models are powering popular virtual assistants in areas like smart health, finance, and autonomous driving. While the parameters of these large language models are improving, concerns persist that these models might not work equally for all subgroups in society. Despite growing discussions of AI fairness across disciplines, there lacks systemic metrics to assess what equity means in dialogue systems and how to engage different populations in the assessment loop. Grounded in theories of deliberative democracy and science and technology studies, this paper proposes an analytical framework for unpacking the meaning of equity in human-AI dialogues. Using this framework, we conducted an auditing study to examine how GPT-3 responded to different sub-populations on crucial science and social topics: climate change and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Our corpus consists of over 20,000 rounds of dialogues between GPT-3 and 3290 individuals who vary in gender, race and ethnicity, education level, English as a first language, and opinions toward the issues. We found a substantively worse user experience with GPT-3 among the opinion and the education minority subpopulations; however, these two groups achieved the largest knowledge gain, changing attitudes toward supporting BLM and climate change efforts after the chat. We traced these user experience divides to conversational differences and found that GPT-3 used more negative expressions when it responded to the education and opinion minority groups, compared to its responses to the majority groups. We discuss the implications of our findings for a deliberative conversational AI system that centralizes diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Anqi Shao

This paper proposes a conceptual framework for understanding AI hallucinations as a distinct form of misinformation. While misinformation scholarship has traditionally focused on human intent, generative AI systems now produce false yet plausible outputs absent of such intent. I argue that these AI hallucinations should not be treated merely as technical failures but as communication phenomena with social consequences. Drawing on a supply-and-demand model and the concept of distributed agency, the framework outlines how hallucinations differ from human-generated misinformation in production, perception, and institutional response. I conclude by outlining a research agenda for communication scholars to investigate the emergence, dissemination, and audience reception of hallucinated content, with attention to macro (institutional), meso (group), and micro (individual) levels. This work urges communication researchers to rethink the boundaries of misinformation theory in light of probabilistic, non-human actors increasingly embedded in knowledge production.

Zening Duan, Anqi Shao, Yicheng Hu et al.

While researchers often study message features like moral content in text, such as party manifestos and social media, their quantification remains a challenge. Conventional human coding struggles with scalability and intercoder reliability. While dictionary-based methods are cost-effective and computationally efficient, they often lack contextual sensitivity and are limited by the vocabularies developed for the original applications. In this paper, we present an approach to construct vec-tionary measurement tools that boost validated dictionaries with word embeddings through nonlinear optimization. By harnessing semantic relationships encoded by embeddings, vec-tionaries improve the measurement of message features from text, especially those in short format, by expanding the applicability of original vocabularies to other contexts. Importantly, a vec-tionary can produce additional metrics to capture the valence and ambivalence of a message feature beyond its strength in texts. Using moral content in tweets as a case study, we illustrate the steps to construct the moral foundations vec-tionary, showcasing its ability to process texts missed by conventional dictionaries and word embedding methods and to produce measurements better aligned with crowdsourced human assessments. Furthermore, additional metrics from the vec-tionary unveiled unique insights that facilitated predicting outcomes such as message retransmission.

Kaiping Chen, Yepeng Jin, Anqi Shao

Misinformation and intergroup bias are two pathologies challenging informed citizenship. This paper examines how identity language is used in misinformation and debunking messages about controversial science on Chinese digital public sphere, and their impact on how the public engage with science. We collected an eight-year time series dataset of public discussion (N=6039) on one of the most controversial science issues in China (GMO) from a popular Q&A platform, Zhihu. We found that both misinformation and debunking messages use a substantial amount of group identity languages when discussing the controversial science issue, which we define as science factionalism -- discussion about science is divided by factions that are formed upon science attitudes. We found that posts that use science factionalism receive more digital votes and comments, even among the science-savvy community in China. Science factionalism also increases the use of negativity in public discourse. We discussed the implications of how science factionalism interacts with the digital attention economy to affect public engagement with science misinformation.