arXiv subjects

Renkai Ma

Publications and source records attributed to Renkai Ma.

26 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2026

From "Fail Fast" to "Mature Safely:" Expert Perspectives as Secondary Stakeholders on Teen-Centered Social Media Risk Detection

In addressing various risks on social media, the HCI community has advocated for teen-centered risk detection technologies over platform-based, parent-centered features. However, their real-world viability remains underexplored by secondary stakeholders beyond the family unit. Therefore, we present an evaluation of a teen-centered social media risk detection dashboard through online interviews with 33 online safety experts. While experts praised our dashboard's clear design for teen agency, their feedback revealed five primary tensions in implementing and sustaining such technology: objective vs. context-dependent risk definition, informing risks vs. meaningful intervention, teen empowerment vs. motivation, need for data vs. data privacy, and independence vs. sustainability. These findings motivate us to rethink "teen-centered" and a shift from a "fail fast" to a "mature safely" paradigm for youth safety technology innovation. We offer design implications for addressing these tensions before system deployment with teens and strategies for aligning secondary stakeholders' interests to deploy and sustain such technologies in the broader ecosystem of youth online safety.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Analyzing Social Media Claims regarding Youth Online Safety Features to Identify Problem Areas and Communication Gaps

Social media platforms have faced increasing scrutiny over whether and how they protect youth online. While online risks to children have been well-documented by prior research, how social media platforms communicate about these risks and their efforts to improve youth safety have not been holistically examined. To fill this gap, we analyzed N=352 press releases and safety-related blogs published between 2019 and 2024 by four platforms popular among youth: YouTube, TikTok, Meta (Facebook and Instagram), and Snapchat. Leveraging both inductive and deductive qualitative approaches, we developed a comprehensive framework of seven problem areas where risks arise, and a taxonomy of safety features that social media platforms claim address these risks. Our analysis revealed uneven emphasis across problem areas, with most communications focused on Content Exposure and Interpersonal Communication, whereas less emphasis was placed on Content Creation, Data Access, and Platform Access. Additionally, we identified three problematic communication practices related to their described safety features, including discrepancies between feature implementation and availability, unclear or inconsistent explanations of safety feature operation, and a lack of evidence regarding the effectiveness of safety features in mitigating risks once implemented. Based on these findings, we discuss the communication gaps between risks and the described safety features, as well as the tensions in achieving transparency in platform communication. Our analysis of platform communication informs guidelines for responsibly communicating about youth safety features.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

LLM Use for Mental Health: Crowdsourcing Users' Sentiment-based Perspectives and Values from Social Discussions

Large language models (LLMs) chatbots like ChatGPT are increasingly used for mental health support. They offer accessible, therapeutic support but also raise concerns about misinformation, over-reliance, and risks in high-stakes contexts of mental health. We crowdsource large-scale users' posts from six major social media platforms to examine how people discuss their interactions with LLM chatbots across different mental health conditions. Through an LLM-assisted pipeline grounded in Value-Sensitive Design (VSD), we mapped the relationships across user-reported sentiments, mental health conditions, perspectives, and values. Our results reveal that the use of LLM chatbots is condition-specific. Users with neurodivergent conditions (e.g., ADHD, ASD) report strong positive sentiments and instrumental or appraisal support, whereas higher-risk disorders (e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) show more negative sentiments. We further uncover how user perspectives co-occur with underlying values, such as identity, autonomy, and privacy. Finally, we discuss shifting from "one-size-fits-all" chatbot design toward condition-specific, value-sensitive LLM design.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Beyond the Uncanny Valley: A Mixed-Method Investigation of Anthropomorphism in Protective Responses to Robot Abuse

Robots with anthropomorphic features are increasingly shaping how humans perceive and morally engage with them. Our research investigates how different levels of anthropomorphism influence protective responses to robot abuse, extending the Computers as Social Actors (CASA) and uncanny valley theories into a moral domain. In an experiment, we invite 201 participants to view videos depicting abuse toward a robot with low (Spider), moderate (Two-Foot), or high (Humanoid) anthropomorphism. To provide a comprehensive analysis, we triangulate three modalities: self-report surveys measuring emotions and uncanniness, physiological data from automated facial expression analysis, and qualitative reflections. Findings indicate that protective responses are not linear. The moderately anthropomorphic Two-Foot robot, rated highest in eeriness and "spine-tingling" sensations consistent with the uncanny valley, elicited the strongest physiological anger expressions. Self-reported anger and guilt are significantly higher for both the Two-Foot and Humanoid robots compared to the Spider. Qualitative findings further reveal that as anthropomorphism increases, moral reasoning shifts from technical assessments of property damage to condemnation of the abuser's character, while governance proposals expand from property law to calls for quasi-animal rights and broader societal responsibility. These results suggest that the uncanny valley does not dampen moral concern but paradoxically heightens protective impulses, offering critical implications for robot design, policy, and future legal frameworks.

cs.RO↗

arXiv2025

I don't Want You to Die: A Shared Responsibility Framework for Safeguarding Child-Robot Companionship

Social robots like Moxie are designed to form strong emotional bonds with children, but their abrupt discontinuation can cause significant struggles and distress to children. When these services end, the resulting harm raises complex questions of who bears responsibility when children's emotional bonds are broken. Using the Moxie shutdown as a case study through a qualitative survey of 72 U.S. participants, our findings show that the responsibility is viewed as a shared duty across the robot company, parents, developers, and government. However, these attributions varied by political ideology and parental status of whether they have children. Participants' perceptions of whether the robot service should continue are highly polarized; supporters propose technical, financial, and governmental pathways for continuity, while opponents cite business realities and risks of unhealthy emotional dependency. Ultimately, this research contributes an empirically grounded shared responsibility framework for safeguarding child-robot companionship by detailing how accountability is distributed and contested, informing concrete design and policy implications to mitigate the emotional harm of robot discontinuation.

cs.RO↗

arXiv2025

When Your Reviewer is an LLM: Biases, Divergence, and Prompt Injection Risks in Peer Review

Peer review is the cornerstone of academic publishing, yet the process is increasingly strained by rising submission volumes, reviewer overload, and expertise mismatches. Large language models (LLMs) are now being used as "reviewer aids," raising concerns about their fairness, consistency, and robustness against indirect prompt injection attacks. This paper presents a systematic evaluation of LLMs as academic reviewers. Using a curated dataset of 1,441 papers from ICLR 2023 and NeurIPS 2022, we evaluate GPT-5-mini against human reviewers across ratings, strengths, and weaknesses. The evaluation employs structured prompting with reference paper calibration, topic modeling, and similarity analysis to compare review content. We further embed covert instructions into PDF submissions to assess LLMs' susceptibility to prompt injection. Our findings show that LLMs consistently inflate ratings for weaker papers while aligning more closely with human judgments on stronger contributions. Moreover, while overarching malicious prompts induce only minor shifts in topical focus, explicitly field-specific instructions successfully manipulate specific aspects of LLM-generated reviews. This study underscores both the promises and perils of integrating LLMs into peer review and points to the importance of designing safeguards that ensure integrity and trust in future review processes.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Towards Trustworthy AI: Characterizing User-Reported Risks across LLMs "In the Wild"

While Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly integrating into daily life, research on their risks often remains lab-based and disconnected from the problems users encounter "in the wild." While recent HCI research has begun to explore these user-facing risks, it typically concentrates on a singular LLM chatbot like ChatGPT or an isolated risk like privacy. To gain a holistic understanding of multi-risk across LLM chatbots, we analyze online discussions on Reddit around seven major LLM chatbots through the U.S. NIST's AI Risk Management Framework. We find that user-reported risks are unevenly distributed and platform-specific. While "Valid and Reliable" risk is the most frequently mentioned, each product also exhibits a unique "risk fingerprint;" for instance, user discussions associate GPT more with "Safe" and "Fair" issues, Gemini with "Privacy," and Claude with "Secure and Resilient" risks. Furthermore, the nature of these risks differs by their prevalence: less frequent risks like "Explainability" and "Privacy" manifest as nuanced user trade-offs, more common ones like "Fairness" are experienced as direct personal harms. Our findings reveal gaps between risks reported by system-centered studies and by users, highlighting the need for user-centered approaches that support users in their daily use of LLM chatbots.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2022

User Experience of Symptom Checkers: A Systematic Review

This review reports the user experience of symptom checkers, aiming to characterize users studied in the existing literature, identify the aspects of user experience of symptom checkers that have been studied, and offer design suggestions. Our literature search resulted in 31 publications. We found that (1) most symptom checker users are relatively young; (2) eight relevant aspects of user experience have been explored, including motivation, trust, acceptability, satisfaction, accuracy, usability, safety or security, and functionality; (3) future symptom checkers should improve their accuracy, safety, and usability.

cs.HC↗