• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

通过辅助和培训提高社交机器人检测能力。

Improving Social Bot Detection Through Aid and Training.

机构信息

United States Army, Fayetteville, NC, USA.

Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

出版信息

Hum Factors. 2024 Oct;66(10):2323-2344. doi: 10.1177/00187208231210145. Epub 2023 Nov 14.

DOI:10.1177/00187208231210145
PMID:37963198
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11382440/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We test the effects of three aids on individuals' ability to detect social bots among Twitter personas: a bot indicator score, a training video, and a warning.

BACKGROUND

Detecting social bots can prevent online deception. We use a simulated social media task to evaluate three aids.

METHOD

Lay participants judged whether each of 60 Twitter personas was a human or social bot in a simulated online environment, using agreement between three machine learning algorithms to estimate the probability of each persona being a bot. Experiment 1 compared a control group and two intervention groups, one provided a bot indicator score for each tweet; the other provided a warning about social bots. Experiment 2 compared a control group and two intervention groups, one receiving the bot indicator scores and the other a training video, focused on heuristics for identifying social bots.

RESULTS

The bot indicator score intervention improved predictive performance and reduced overconfidence in both experiments. The training video was also effective, although somewhat less so. The warning had no effect. Participants rarely reported willingness to share content for a persona that they labeled as a bot, even when they agreed with it.

CONCLUSIONS

Informative interventions improved social bot detection; warning alone did not.

APPLICATION

We offer an experimental testbed and methodology that can be used to evaluate and refine interventions designed to reduce vulnerability to social bots. We show the value of two interventions that could be applied in many settings.

摘要

目的

我们测试了三种辅助手段对个体识别 Twitter 账号中社交机器人的能力的影响:机器人指标得分、培训视频和警告。

背景

检测社交机器人可以防止在线欺骗。我们使用模拟社交媒体任务来评估这三种辅助手段。

方法

非专业参与者在模拟的在线环境中判断 60 个 Twitter 账号中的每一个是人类还是社交机器人,使用三个机器学习算法之间的一致性来估计每个账号是机器人的概率。实验 1 比较了对照组和两个干预组,一组为每条推文提供机器人指标得分;另一组提供了关于社交机器人的警告。实验 2 比较了对照组和两个干预组,一组提供机器人指标得分,另一组提供了培训视频,重点是识别社交机器人的启发式方法。

结果

机器人指标得分干预在两个实验中都提高了预测性能和减少了过度自信。培训视频也很有效,尽管效果稍差一些。警告没有效果。参与者很少表示愿意分享他们标记为机器人的账号的内容,即使他们同意这个标记。

结论

提供信息的干预措施提高了社交机器人的检测能力;仅警告没有效果。

应用

我们提供了一个实验测试平台和方法,可以用来评估和改进旨在降低社交机器人易受攻击的干预措施。我们展示了两种干预措施的价值,这些措施可以在许多场景中应用。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/251e873dde1f/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/b21cdcb3d1d8/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/7e912ccba59b/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/5f47857ea323/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/6798daa11bb7/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/af41639258ab/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/eb521869a932/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/251e873dde1f/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig7.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/b21cdcb3d1d8/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/7e912ccba59b/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/5f47857ea323/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/6798daa11bb7/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/af41639258ab/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/eb521869a932/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3ecf/11382440/251e873dde1f/10.1177_00187208231210145-fig7.jpg

相似文献

1
Improving Social Bot Detection Through Aid and Training.通过辅助和培训提高社交机器人检测能力。
Hum Factors. 2024 Oct;66(10):2323-2344. doi: 10.1177/00187208231210145. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
2
Duped by Bots: Why Some are Better than Others at Detecting Fake Social Media Personas.被机器人骗了:为什么有些人比其他人更善于发现假的社交媒体账号。
Hum Factors. 2024 Jan;66(1):88-102. doi: 10.1177/00187208211072642. Epub 2022 Feb 24.
3
Insights into elections: An ensemble bot detection coverage framework applied to the 2018 U.S. midterm elections.选举洞察:适用于 2018 年美国中期选举的集成机器人检测覆盖框架。
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 6;16(1):e0244309. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244309. eCollection 2021.
4
An adept approach to ascertain and elude probable social bots attacks on twitter and twitch employing machine learning approach.一种采用机器学习方法来确定并规避推特和Twitch上可能存在的社交机器人攻击的娴熟方法。
MethodsX. 2023 Oct 10;11:102430. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102430. eCollection 2023 Dec.
5
The False positive problem of automatic bot detection in social science research.自动化 Bot 检测在社会科学研究中的假阳性问题。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 22;15(10):e0241045. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241045. eCollection 2020.
6
Assessing the Role of Social Bots During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Infodemic, Disagreement, and Criticism.评估新冠疫情期间社交机器人的作用:信息疫情、分歧和批评。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Aug 25;24(8):e36085. doi: 10.2196/36085.
7
Statin Twitter: Human and Automated Bot Contributions, 2010 to 2022.他汀类药物推特:2010 年至 2022 年的人类和自动机器人贡献。
J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Apr 2;13(7):e032678. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.032678. Epub 2024 Mar 27.
8
Detecting Bots on Russian Political Twitter.检测俄罗斯政治推特上的机器人。
Big Data. 2017 Dec;5(4):310-324. doi: 10.1089/big.2017.0038.
9
Detection and impact estimation of social bots in the Chilean Twitter network.检测和估计智利 Twitter 网络中的社交机器人。
Sci Rep. 2024 Mar 19;14(1):6525. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-57227-3.
10
Social Bots: Human-Like by Means of Human Control?社交机器人:通过人为控制实现类人化?
Big Data. 2017 Dec;5(4):279-293. doi: 10.1089/big.2017.0044.

本文引用的文献

1
Who Gets Caught in the Web of Lies?: Understanding Susceptibility to Phishing Emails, Fake News Headlines, and Scam Text Messages.谁容易陷入谎言的网络中?:了解易受网络钓鱼邮件、假新闻标题和诈骗短信影响的原因。
Hum Factors. 2024 Jun;66(6):1742-1753. doi: 10.1177/00187208231173263. Epub 2023 May 1.
2
Botometer 101: social bot practicum for computational social scientists.Botometer 101:面向计算社会科学家的社交机器人实践
J Comput Soc Sci. 2022;5(2):1511-1528. doi: 10.1007/s42001-022-00177-5. Epub 2022 Aug 20.
3
Duped by Bots: Why Some are Better than Others at Detecting Fake Social Media Personas.
被机器人骗了:为什么有些人比其他人更善于发现假的社交媒体账号。
Hum Factors. 2024 Jan;66(1):88-102. doi: 10.1177/00187208211072642. Epub 2022 Feb 24.
4
Is the key to phishing training persistence?: Developing a novel persistent intervention.网络钓鱼培训坚持的关键是什么?:开发一种新颖的持久性干预措施。
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2022 Mar;28(1):85-99. doi: 10.1037/xap0000410. Epub 2022 Feb 14.
5
General Practitioners' Attitudes Toward Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Systems: Interview Study.全科医生对人工智能系统的态度:访谈研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jan 27;24(1):e28916. doi: 10.2196/28916.
6
Misinformation warnings: Twitter's soft moderation effects on COVID-19 vaccine belief echoes.错误信息警告:推特的温和审核对新冠疫苗信念回声的影响
Comput Secur. 2022 Mar;114:102577. doi: 10.1016/j.cose.2021.102577. Epub 2021 Dec 16.
7
Data quality of platforms and panels for online behavioral research.在线行为研究的平台和面板的数据质量。
Behav Res Methods. 2022 Aug;54(4):1643-1662. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01694-3. Epub 2021 Sep 29.
8
A Signal Detection Approach to Understanding the Identification of Fake News.一种用于理解假新闻识别的信号检测方法。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):78-98. doi: 10.1177/1745691620986135. Epub 2021 Jul 15.
9
Do as AI say: susceptibility in deployment of clinical decision-aids.按照人工智能所说的去做:临床决策辅助工具部署中的易感性。
NPJ Digit Med. 2021 Feb 19;4(1):31. doi: 10.1038/s41746-021-00385-9.
10
Seeing the Bigger Picture: Susceptibility to, and Detection of, Deception.着眼大局:对欺骗的易感性及对欺骗的察觉
J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2020 Nov 4;42(6):463-471. doi: 10.1123/jsep.2020-0040. Print 2020 Dec 1.