In flexible education, recommender systems that support course selection, are considered a viable means to help students in making informed course selections, especially where curricula offer greater flexibility. However, these recommender systems present both potential benefits and looming risks, such as overdependence on technology, biased recommendations, and privacy issues. User control mechanisms in recommender interfaces (or algorithmic affordances) might offer options to address those risks, but they have not been systematically studied yet. This paper presents the outcomes of a design session conducted during the INTERACT23 workshop on Algorithmic Affordances in Recommender Interfaces. This design session yielded insights in how the design of an interface, and specifically the algorithmic affordances in these interfaces, may address the ethical risks and dilemmas of using a recommender in such an impactful context by potentially vulnerable users. Through design and reflection, we discovered a host of design ideas for the interface of a flexible education interface, that can serve as conversation starters for practitioners implementing flexible education. More research is needed to explore these design directions and to gain insights on how they can help to approximate more ethically operating recommender systems.
LINK
This exploratory study investigates the rationale behind categorizing algorithmic controls, or algorithmic affordances, in the graphical user interfaces (GUIs) of recommender systems. Seven professionals from industry and academia took part in an open card sorting activity to analyze 45 cards with examples of algorithmic affordances in recommender systems’ GUIs. Their objective was to identify potential design patterns including features on which to base these patterns. Analyzing the group discussions revealed distinct thought processes and defining factors for design patterns that were shared by academic and industry partners. While the discussions were promising, they also demonstrated a varying degree of alignment between industry and academia when it came to labelling the identified categories. Since this workshop is part of the preparation for creating a design pattern library of algorithmic affordances, and since the library aims to be useful for both industry and research partners, further research into design patterns of algorithmic affordances, particularly in terms of labelling and description, is required in order to establish categories that resonate with all relevant parties
LINK
Albeit the widespread application of recommender systems (RecSys) in our daily lives, rather limited research has been done on quantifying unfairness and biases present in such systems. Prior work largely focuses on determining whether a RecSys is discriminating or not but does not compute the amount of bias present in these systems. Biased recommendations may lead to decisions that can potentially have adverse effects on individuals, sensitive user groups, and society. Hence, it is important to quantify these biases for fair and safe commercial applications of these systems. This paper focuses on quantifying popularity bias that stems directly from the output of RecSys models, leading to over recommendation of popular items that are likely to be misaligned with user preferences. Four metrics to quantify popularity bias in RescSys over time in dynamic setting across different sensitive user groups have been proposed. These metrics have been demonstrated for four collaborative filteri ng based RecSys algorithms trained on two commonly used benchmark datasets in the literature. Results obtained show that the metrics proposed provide a comprehensive understanding of growing disparities in treatment between sensitive groups over time when used conjointly.
DOCUMENT
