Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI & Society

aiqbench analysis

This paper addresses the critical gap in evaluating AI-driven sociotechnical interventions by proposing a multi-criteria framework that balances effectiveness with feasibility, cost, and user acceptance. Using misinformation countermeasures as a case study, it demonstrates that the most technically effective solutions often fail due to implementation constraints or public resistance, offering practitioners a necessary decision-making tool for real-world deployment.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Beyond Effectiveness: A Multi-Criteria Framework for Comparing Practical Socio-Technical Interventions

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2608.20649v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Designers and policymakers in sociotechnical domains like content moderation, privacy interfaces, recommender systems and beyond, must choose among a growing menu of proposed interventions, but typically lack a principled basis for comparing them. Prior work tends to evaluate interventions individually and mostly along the effectiveness criteria, while implementation constraints such as cost, effort and feasibility are often considered separately. We present a multi-criteria framework for evaluating sociotechnical interventions. This framework is instantiated through the case of misinformation, a domain of intense focus for proposed countermeasures. We survey $N=39$ researchers on 40 operationalized interventions across five evaluative criteria: political feasibility, effectiveness, user acceptance, cost, and implementation effort. We find that the interventions that experts judge to be the most effective are not always the most acceptable to the public or the most feasible to implement. We also discuss how this tension has implications for the design of sociotechnical interventions beyond misinformation, and offer a decision framework for practitioners navigating the trade-offs of sociotechnical interventions.

Abstract:Designers and policymakers in sociotechnical domains like content moderation, privacy interfaces, recommender systems and beyond, must choose among a growing menu of proposed interventions, but typically lack a principled basis for comparing them. Prior work tends to evaluate interventions individually and mostly along the effectiveness criteria, while implementation constraints such as cost, effort and feasibility are often considered separately. We present a multi-criteria framework for evaluating sociotechnical interventions. This framework is instantiated through the case of misinformation, a domain of intense focus for proposed countermeasures. We survey $N=39$ researchers on 40 operationalized interventions across five evaluative criteria: political feasibility, effectiveness, user acceptance, cost, and implementation effort. We find that the interventions that experts judge to be the most effective are not always the most acceptable to the public or the most feasible to implement. We also discuss how this tension has implications for the design of sociotechnical interventions beyond misinformation, and offer a decision framework for practitioners navigating the trade-offs of sociotechnical interventions.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2608.20649 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2608.20649v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.20649 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 257 words

Related coverage