Bias in AI systems poses risks of unfair outcomes, especially in sensitive domains such as healthcare. Existing approaches often address fairness only at the algorithmic level, leaving broader system-level safeguards under-specified. This paper presents a model-driven methodology for embedding AI bias requirements into SysML, enabling ethical concerns to be captured alongside functional and technical requirements. The methodology models safeguards such as confidence scoring, fairness evaluators, and human-in-the-loop oversight as firstclass SysML requirements, blocks, and interactions, ensuring traceability and verifiability within model-driven engineering processes. We demonstrate the approach through a smart home case study for early chronic kidney disease (CKD) monitoring, where system diagrams explicitly incorporate bias mitigation elements. This work contributes a structured method for operationalising ethical requirements in AI-enabled systems and lays the foundation for extending model-driven engineering with dedicated ethics modelling patterns.

Objectives To assess the feasibility and acceptability of three SMS-delivered safer gambling interventions (goal setting (GS), descriptive norms (DN), injunctive norms (IN)) aimed at reducing the transition from low or moderate risk of gambling harm to problematic gambling, and the feasibility of a full-scale randomised controlled trial evaluating their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.Design Four-arm, parallel-group, pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study with a nested qualitative study.Setting The study was conducted in the UK. Participants were recruited online via UK-licensed gambling operators’ websites.Participants Adults aged ≥18 years, gambling online at least weekly, with low-to-moderate gambling risk levels.Interventions Participants were block randomised in equal proportions to a delayed intervention control group or one of three 6-week text message interventions delivered via the secure messaging app WIRE: (1) GS: weekly prompts to set gambling-related goals with personalised feedback; (2) DN: weekly messages challenging misperceptions about peer gambling behaviours and (3) IN: weekly messages addressing misperceptions about peer attitudes towards gambling.Outcome measures Feasibility was assessed through recruitment and retention rates, intervention adherence, data completeness and feasibility and acceptability of the interventions and study procedures. Secondary outcomes included gambling risk behaviours and cognitions, anxiety, depression, quality of life, healthcare use and productivity, measured at baseline, 7-weeks, and 3- and 6-months post-randomisation.Results Recruitment took place between April 2021 and August 2022 with final follow-up in February 2023. 167 participants (mean age 51.5; 36% male) were randomised (GS=43; DN=41; IN=42; Control=41). Retention at 6-months was 95.2%, with >95% completion for all outcome measures. Intervention adherence was high, with >95% of DN and IN participants responding to ≥4 messages and 93% of GS participants setting ≥4 goals. Qualitative findings indicated broad acceptability of the interventions and study procedures.Conclusions The study was feasible to conduct, interventions and study procedures acceptable to participants, and predefined progression criteria met. Findings support proceeding to a full-scale randomised controlled trial of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, focusing on the social norms interventions.Trial registration number ISRCTN37874344.

A previous co-design research study proposed various user interface designs (UIDs) aimed at motivating users to engage in corrective actions and challenge others who post misinformation. This paper assesses the effectiveness of two such UIDs in promoting user correction, compared to the existing designs of mainstream social media platforms. The UIDs are "privately challenge toggle" (enabling an easy switch to private conversation mode with the misinformation poster) and "discuss section" (a dedicated thread for arguments to avoid cluttering the main comment box). Additionally, the study considers the perceived importance of the misinformation content as a variable to be accounted for. An online within-subject vignette experimental study with 306 UK Facebook users (111 male, 194 female and 1 non-binary) compared the proposed designs to the existing one, focusing on usability parameters such as effectiveness, acceptability, and comfort. Results indicate that participants rated usability of both proposed UIDs favorably compared to the existing design. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA exploring the impact of the interaction between the UIDs and content importance on the likelihood of engaging in user correction revealed a significant interaction: when the content is not important, the "privately challenge toggle" is more effective than the existing design. Conversely, when the content is important, users are more inclined to challenge misinformation using the existing design rather than the "discuss section." This research provides insights into re-designing social media to promote user correction and highlights the importance of considering both the suitability of the UIDs and the perceived importance of misinformation posts.

Despite the effectiveness of the User Correction approach in combating misinformation, people on social media often avoid correcting others due to fears of consequences and doubts about its usefulness. Users' perceptions and misperceptions regarding challenging misinformation-a form of User Correction-remain underexplored. This study, based on data from 250 UK-based social media users, examined misperceptions about correcting misinformation and their impact on the likelihood of taking action. The findings reveal that individuals hold misperceptions about the negative consequences of challenging others and the acceptability of such behavior. These consequences include perceived negative effects on relationships, harm to the person being challenged, and the belief that challenging misinformation is ineffective. Participants believed that challenging others could damage relationships more than being challenged themselves, and they perceived challenging others as more futile than being challenged. Those who viewed correcting misinformation as more socially acceptable for others were more likely to engage in such actions. Injunctive norms and perceived negative impacts on the person being challenged also influenced the likelihood of participating in User Correction. This study highlights the importance of addressing users' attitudes and misperceptions to develop effective user-centric countermeasures on social media. The findings suggest that a social norms approach to behavior change may be a promising strategy to encourage corrective actions.

Recent research underscored the resurgence of webcam-based eye tracking as a cost-effective, ecologically valid, and scalable choice, attributed to advancements in machine learning-assisted calibration methods. Online gambling poses a public health concern, necessitating innovative research methods and evidence-based strategies for harm reduction. This study investigates users' fixation patterns on responsible gambling (RG) information in different formats on gambling websites using webcam-based eye tracking. Participants browsed six gambling websites to search for RG information. 19 participants' data were analyzed on Areas of Interest (AOIs) categorized based on RG formats. The study has found that usability varied across RG formats and also highlights both feasibility and challenges of webcam-based eye tracking for online behavior research, with practical implications to gambling stakeholders.

Misinformation can harm individuals and societies, with social media and online communities amplifying its reach and impact. One effective strategy to counteract the spread of misinformation online is social corrections, in which people on social media actively challenge others who post or spread it. People hesitate to do so for reasons related to empathy, fear of affecting their relationships, futility, and subjective norms. This research aims to explore the impact of empathy on individuals’ willingness to challenge misinformation. The research also investigates the mediation role of the personal factors of perspective-taking and the need for cognition, along with the perceived impacts on their relationships, on the relationship between empathy and the willingness to challenge. The data was collected from 250 UK-based social networking users and then analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. The results of the analysis supported that perspective-taking (β = 0.064, p = 0.011), the need for cognition (β = 0.022, p = 0.048), and perceived relationship costs (β = 0.035, p = 0.003) all fully mediated the impact of empathy on the willingness to challenge misinformation. The results also show that empathy does not have a direct impact on willingness to challenge misinformation. Individuals with varying levels of empathy converge in their attitudes toward challenging misinformation influenced by a combination of cognitive processes and considerations of their relationships.

This study investigates the barriers to challenging others who post misinformation on social media platforms. We conducted a survey amongst U.K. Facebook users (143 (57.2%) women, 104 (41.6%) men) to assess the extent to which the barriers to correcting others, as identified in literature across disciplines, apply to correcting misinformation on social media. We also group the barriers into factors and explore demographic differences amongst them. It has been suggested that users are generally hesitant to challenge misinformation. We found that most of our participants (58.8%) were reluctant to challenge misinformation. We also identified moderating roles of age and gender in the likelihood of challenging misinformation. Older people were more likely to challenge misinformation compared to young adults while, men demonstrated a slightly greater likelihood to challenge compared to women. The 20 barriers influencing the decision to challenge misinformation, were then grouped into four main factors: social concerns, effort/interest considerations, prosocial intents, and content-related factors. We found that, controlling for age and gender, “social concerns” and “effort/interest considerations” have the significant impact on likelihood to challenge. Identified four factors were analysed in terms of demographic differences. Men ranked “effort/interest considerations” higher than women, while women placed higher importance on “content-related factors”. Moreover, older individuals were found to be more resilient to “social concerns”. The influence of educational background was most prominent in ranking “content-related factors”. Our findings provide important insights for the design of future interventions aimed at encouraging the challenging of misinformation on social media platforms, highlighting the need for tailored, demographically sensitive approaches.

The spread of misinformation on social media is a critical issue. One potential solution to mitigate the spread is user corrections; however, users often refrain due to various concerns. Leveraging the established influence of user interface design (UID) on how user interact with and respond to misinformation, this study investigates how user interface features can be designed to motivate users to challenge misinformation. It is aimed at gaining insights into users’ needs and UID requirements that encourage this behaviour. We conducted four codesign sessions with 18 social media users (age range 20–60 years M=39.1; 10 female and 8 male). We applied the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) as a theoretical framework and analysed our data based on the core constructs of this framework: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions. Our findings reveal four design considerations: creating secure and supportive environments, facilitating informed discussions through easy confrontation and access to reliable resources, leveraging recognition and social proof, and user support infrastructure. We also identified specific design elements with users, including indirection, semianonymity and privacy, simplicity, one-click challenging, easy access to reliable sources, recognition, displaying social proof, and platform support. These elements are aimed at reducing social discomfort and making the process of correcting misinformation more approachable for users. Our findings offer actionable insights for social media platform designers to reduce the spread of misinformation by creating environments that encourage constructive dialogues and allow users to challenge misinformation without fear of conflict.

Research conducted in the UK explored the presence of misperceptions, revealing that people anticipated more negative consequences for challenging misinformation on social media. These misperceptions include the anticipation of harming relationships, causing embarrassment and offense to others, the belief that challenging may not yield success and the perception that such behaviour is unacceptable. As the UK culture is characterised as individualistic, we replicated this investigation in a collectivistic culture-Arab societies. Our aim is to explore the differences and similarities of these misperceptions across cultures and to examine whether applying the social norms approach can be a solution to address the inaction towards challenging misinformation. Comparing the UK (N = 250) and Arabs (N = 212), we showed that, in both cultures there are misperceptions towards challenging misinformation. While misperceptions regarding concerning relationship costs and futility remain consistent across cultures the concerns about causing harm to others and the acceptability of the behaviour differ. Participants in the UK show a higher concern about offense or embarrassment, in contrast, participants in Arab countries exhibit higher misperceptions about injunctive norms, perceiving challenging misinformation as less socially acceptable than it actually is. This study also shows that participants' likelihood to challenge misinformation is influenced by their misperceptions about potential harm to others and perceived injunctive norms. These findings present an opportunity to apply the social norms approach to behaviour change by addressing these misperceptions. Messages emphasising social acceptability of correcting misinformation and highlighting that people appreciate being corrected could serve as powerful tools to encourage users to challenge misinformation.

Gambling, though a popular social activity, can lead to addiction and cause significant harm. This study aimed to explore the experiences of 36 low-to-moderate risk gamblers (PGSI score 0-7; 31 male, 5 female; 10 per each intervention arm, 6 per control group) in the 'EROGamb 2.0' feasibility trial (n =168). The trial used social norm messages and goal setting feedback to promote safer gambling behaviour. Participants took part in semistructured interviews via telephone or audio calls using Zoom or Wire, a secure messaging app. The interviews were analysed using Framework Analysis. Most participants found the interventions interesting and useful, though some reported no change in their gambling behaviour. Motivations for joining the trial included interest in the topic, altruism, and financial incentives. Participants appreciated the study's clear information, efficient processes, and helpful notifications, despite some technical issues. Reactions to social norm messages were mixed, with some expressing scepticism about the statistics. However, the goal setting intervention was well-received, with participants valuing the clarity and usefulness of the information. External factors, such as promotional offers from gambling companies, influenced gambling behaviour. The findings support the feasibility and acceptability of social norm and goal setting interventions to reduce gambling behaviour, highlighting the need for personalised approaches in future research.

Challenging others who post misinformation is a type of social correction that complements algorithm-based approaches. However, participation rates in such social acts remain limited. In this paper, we study design techniques that leverage principles of persuasive system design and communication theories to foster such prosocial behaviour across two distinct cultural contexts: the British and the Arab. A total of 462 participants completed an online survey (250 UK, 212 Arabs). The study compared the two cultural contexts regarding willingness to challenge misinformation and the persuasiveness of seven design techniques to increase that willingness, namely predefined question stickers, thinking face reaction, sentence openers, fact checker badge, social norm messages, tone detector, and private commenting. Moreover, it explores the impact of individuals' characteristics on their perception of the techniques as being more or less persuasive than a standard comment box. The study found that the willingness to challenge misinformation was significantly higher in the Arab context than in the UK context. Moreover, except for the private commenting, all techniques were more impactful in the Arab context than in the UK context. Some techniques, such as predefined question stickers, were more effective in both cultures compared to the standard comment box, while others, like the fact checker badge, were more effective only in the Arab context. However, in the UK, sentence openers had a lower impact. Furthermore, personality traits, age, and perspective-taking showed the potential but also the varying impacts on the persuasiveness of the techniques on users' correction of misinformation across both cultural contexts while pointing to the need for considering both personal and cultural factors in designing social-correction-based solutions.

Persuasive design techniques have often been presented where the desired behaviour is primarily within personal boundaries, e.g., one's own health and learning. Limited research has been conducted on behaviours that require exposure to others, including correcting, confronting mistakes and wrongdoing. Challenging misinformation in others’ posts online is an example of such social behaviour. This study draws on the main persuasive system design models and principles to create interfaces on social media to motivate users to challenge misinformation. We conducted a questionnaire (with 250 participants from the UK) to test the influence of these interfaces on willingness to challenge and how age, gender, personality traits, perspective-taking and empathy affected their perception of the persuasiveness of the interfaces. Our proposed interfaces exemplify seven persuasive strategies: reduction, suggestion, self-monitoring, recognition, normative influence, tunneling and liking. Most participants thought existing social media did not provide enough techniques and tools to challenge misinformation. While predefined question stickers (suggestion), private commenting (reduction), and thinking face reactions (liking) were seen as effective ways to motivate users to challenge misinformation, sentence openers (tunneling) was seen as the least influential. Increasing age and perspective taking were associated with increased likelihood of perceived persuasiveness and increasing openness to experience was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of perceived persuasiveness for “predefined question stickers”. Increasing openness to experience was associated with increased likelihood of perceived persuasiveness for “thinking face reaction”, while increasing age was associated with a reduction in the likelihood of perceived persuasiveness for “private commenting”.

PurposeThere is a scarcity of research studies on why people remain inactive when encountering and recognising misinformation online. The main aim of this paper is to provide a groundwork for future research into why users do not challenge misinformation on digital platforms by generating hypotheses through a synthesis of pertinent literature, including organisational behaviour, communication, human-computer interaction (HCI), psychology and education.Design/methodology/approachGiven the lack of directly related literature, this paper synthesised findings from relevant fields where the findings might be relevant, as the tendency to withhold opinions or feedback is a well-documented practice in offline interaction.FindingsFollowing the analysis of relevant literature, the potential reasons for online silence towards misinformation can be divided into six categories: self-oriented, relationship-oriented, others-oriented, content-oriented, individual characteristics and technical factors.Originality/valueAlthough corrections coming from peers can effectively combat misinformation, several studies showed that people in cyberspace do not take such action. To the best of the authors' knowledge, there has been scarce and virtually non-existent research investigating why people refrain from challenging others who post misinformation online. Thus, this paper attempts to address this gap and identify reasons in adjacent domains. The reasons provide a starting point for researching interventions to reduce reluctance and abstinence regarding the challenge of misinformation. The findings can be beneficial beyond the area of challenging misinformation and are extensible to other types of content and communication that people are hesitant to discuss and challenge, such as online injustice, prejudice and hate speech.

Our survey included 250 UK-based social media users and aimed to identify the factors that contribute to users’ reluctance to challenge misinformation.The study found that people have misperceptions about the negative consequences of challenging misinformation and the acceptability of the behaviour. The negative consequences were categorized into three categories: relationship consequences, negative impact on others, and futility. Participants perceived higher relationship consequences and futility for others than themselves. Additionally, people anticipate more negative reactions from others when being challenged for sharing misinformation than they themselves expect. Those who believed that others think challenging misinformation is more socially acceptable than themselves were more likely to challenge. Moreover, age, injunctive norms and perceived negative impact on others have an impact on willingness to challenge.Overall, the study underscores the significance of understanding the role of perceptions and misperceptions in challenging misinformation. Developing features on social media that facilitate challenging misinformation or fostering social norms that endorse it can address these misperceptions. To develop the right approach understanding of users and their motivations is crucial. Our study paves the way for the development of effective user-centric countermeasures by shedding light about user’s attitudes, perceptions and misperceptions.

This study investigates the factors influencing the willingness to challenge misinformation on social media across two cultural contexts, the United Kingdom (UK) and Arab countries. A total of 462 participants completed an online survey (250 UK, 212 Arabs). The analysis revealed that three types of negative consequences (relationship cost, negative impact on the person being challenged, futility) and also injunctive norms influence the willingness to challenge misinformation. Cross-cultural comparisons using t-tests showed significant differences between the UK and the Arab countries in all factors except the injunctive norms. Multiple regression analyses identified differences between the UK and Arab participants concerning which of the factors predicted the willingness to challenge misinformation. The findings suggest that participants' self-reported injunctive norms play a significant role in shaping their willingness to engage in corrective actions across both cultural contexts. Moreover, UK participants' reporting of how others perceive negative impact on the person being challenged and injunctive norms were significant predictors, while for the Arabs, only the perceived relationship costs emerged as a significant predictor. This study has important implications for policymakers and social media platforms in developing culturally sensitive interventions encouraging users to correct misinformation.

IntroductionGambling is increasingly recognised as an important public health issue. Problem gambling is associated with highly negative impacts on physical, psychological and social well-being, not only for those who gamble but also for those around them. There has been a rapid expansion of internet gambling and attributes such as continuous play and instant rewards, and enhanced privacy may lead to a greater likelihood of gambling-related harms. In this randomised controlled feasibility study, we are testing (1) the acceptability and feasibility of three online responsible gambling interventions targeting people with low-to-moderate risk of online problem gambling and (2) the feasibility of a future full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Methods and analysisFour-arm randomised controlled feasibility study with qualitative substudy. One-hundred and forty UK residents with low-to-moderate risk of online gambling recruited via gambling operators and social media will be randomised (1:1:1:1) to either (1) goal setting, (2) descriptive norms messages (challenge perceptions of peer behaviours), (3) injunctive norms messages (challenge perceptions of peer attitudes) and (4) control (delayed intervention). Interventions will be delivered over 6weeks and individually tailored. Outcomes, administered online, will be measured at baseline, 7weeks, and 3 and 6months post randomisation (including gambling risk behaviours and cognitions, anxiety and depression, quality of life, health use and productivity). Analyses will be descriptive, focusing on feasibility and acceptability of the interventions and study procedures. Telephone/online interviews, with a subsample of approximately 30 participants, will elicit experiences of participating in the study. Prespecified progression criteria will guide decisions around whether to progress to a definitive RCT. Ethics and disseminationEthical approval obtained from Bournemouth University Research Ethics Committee (reference number 33247). Participants will be given a participant information sheet plus a 'Key Facts' summary and will provide informed online consent. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences and public engagement events. Trial registration numberISRCTN37874344.

In the current age of emerging technologies and big data, transparency has become an important issue for technology users and online consumers. However, there is a lack of consensus on what constitutes transparency across domains of research, not to mention transparency guidelines for designers and marketers. In this review, we explored the question of what transparency means in current research and practices by reviewing the literature in three domains: persuasive technology, immersive technology and online marketing. Literature reviewed, including both empirical research and position articles, covered multidisciplinary areas including computer science and information technology, psychology, healthcare, human computer interaction, business and management, law and public health. In this paper, we summarized our findings through a framework of transparency and provided insights into the different aspects of transparency, categorized into ten themes (i.e., Organizational Transparency, Information Transparency, Transparency of System Design, Data Privacy and Informed Consent, Transparency of Online Advertising, Potential Risks, User Autonomy, Informed Decision Making, Information Visualization, Personalization and User-centered design) along three dimensions (i.e., Types of transparency, Impact on User and Potential Solutions). Addressing aspects of transparency will facilitate users’ autonomy and contribute to their informed decision making.

In the world of information technology and the Internet, which has become a part of human life today and is constantly expanding, Attention to the users' requirements such as information security, fast processing, dynamic and instant access, and costs savings has become essential. The solution that is proposed for such problems today is a technology that is called cloud computing. Today, cloud computing is considered one of the most essential distributed tools for processing and storing data on the Internet. With the increasing using this tool, the need to schedule tasks to make the best use of resources and respond appropriately to requests has received much attention, and in this regard, many efforts have been made and are being made. To this purpose, various algorithms have been proposed to calculate resource allocation, each of which has tried to solve equitable distribution challenges while using maximum resources. One of these calculation methods is the DRF algorithm. Although it offers a better approach than previous algorithms, it faces challenges, especially with time-consuming resource allocation computing. These challenges make the use of DRF more complex than ever in the low number of requests with high resource capacity as well as the high number of simultaneous requests. This study tried to reduce the computations costs associated with the DRF algorithm for resource allocation by introducing a new approach to using this DRF algorithm to automate calculations by machine learning and artificial intelligence algorithms (Autonomic Dominant Resource Fairness or A-DRF).