REVIEW 4 cited by
Cleaning Up the Streets: Understanding Motivations, Mental Models, and Concerns of Users Flagging Social Media Content
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Social media platforms offer flagging, a technical feature that empowers users to report inappropriate posts or bad actors to reduce online harm. The deceptively simple flagging interfaces on nearly all major social media platforms disguise complex underlying interactions among users, algorithms, and moderators. Through interviewing 25 social media users with prior flagging experience, most of whom belong to marginalized groups, we examine end-users' understanding of flagging procedures, explore the factors that motivate them to flag, and surface their cognitive and privacy concerns. We found that a lack of procedural transparency in flagging mechanisms creates gaps in users' mental models, yet they strongly believe that platforms must provide flagging options. Our findings highlight how flags raise critical questions about distributing labor and responsibility between platforms and users for addressing online harm. We recommend innovations in the flagging design space that enhance user comprehension, ensure privacy, and reduce cognitive burdens.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Commenotes: Synthesizing Organic Comments to Support Community-Based Fact-Checking
A filtering plus LLM synthesis pipeline turns early user comments into community-note-style fact-checks; the best model beats human notes in 70.1% of pairwise user ratings.
-
"I thought it was my mistake, but it's really the design'': A Critical Examination of the Accessibility of User-Enacted Moderation Tools on Facebook and X
Blind and low-vision users face learning, compliance, and psychological costs when using moderation tools on Facebook and X, due to poor accessibility design.
-
The Pin of Shame: Examining Content Creators' Adoption of Pinning Inappropriate Comments as a Moderation Strategy
Creators pin negative comments to invite public shaming as a moderation tactic, gaining social support and norm enforcement while risking emotional strain and escalation.
-
Reply, Delete, or Ignore? Examining How Content Creators Perceive and Select Comment Moderation Strategies
Content creators' moderation choices (delete, reply, ignore) are driven by perceived safety and public image benefits, but not by expected algorithmic rewards; deletion is seen as safest, replying as most algorithmica...
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.