Investigating User Perception of Gender Bias in Image Search: The Role of Sexism

There is growing evidence that search engines produce results that are socially biased, reinforcing a view of the world that aligns with prevalent social stereotypes. One means to promote greater transparency of search algorithms - which are typically complex and proprietary - is to raise user awareness of biased result sets. However, to date, little is known concerning how users perceive bias in search results, and the degree to which their perceptions differ and/or might be predicted based on user attributes. One particular area of search that has recently gained attention, and forms the focus of this study, is image retrieval and gender bias. We conduct a controlled experiment via crowdsourcing using participants recruited from three countries to measure the extent to which workers perceive a given image results set to be subjective or objective. Demographic information about the workers, along with measures of sexism, are gathered and analysed to investigate whether (gender) biases in the image search results can be detected. Amongst other findings, the results confirm that sexist people are less likely to detect and report gender biases in image search results.

[1]  S. Fiske,et al.  Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  Lynda Hardman,et al.  Querylog-based assessment of retrievability bias in a large newspaper corpus , 2016, 2016 IEEE/ACM Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL).

[3]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Unequal Representation and Gender Stereotypes in Image Search Results for Occupations , 2015, CHI.

[4]  Elaine G. Toms,et al.  Image use within the work task model: Images as information and illustration , 2009 .

[5]  Ryen W. White Beliefs and biases in web search , 2013, SIGIR.

[6]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. , 1996 .

[7]  Ronald E. Robertson,et al.  The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[8]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  Quantifying Search Bias: Investigating Sources of Bias for Political Searches in Social Media , 2017, CSCW.

[9]  Simone Stumpf,et al.  Expeditions through image jungles: The commercial use of image libraries in an online environment , 2015, J. Documentation.

[10]  Malcolm S. Gordon The Eels of the Genus Stilbiscus , 1954 .

[11]  A. Abele,et al.  The bigger one of the "Big Two"? Preferential processing of communal information , 2011 .

[12]  Bogdan Wojciszke,et al.  Towards an operationalization of the fundamental dimensions of agency and communion: Trait content ratings in five countries considering valence and frequency of word occurrence , 2008 .

[13]  Leif Azzopardi,et al.  Retrievability: an evaluation measure for higher order information access tasks , 2008, CIKM '08.

[14]  Amy J. C. Cuddy,et al.  Warmth and Competence As Universal Dimensions of Social Perception: The Stereotype Content Model and the BIAS Map , 2008 .

[15]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods , 2010 .

[16]  G. Āllport The Nature of Prejudice , 1954 .

[17]  Paul D. Clough,et al.  Competent Men and Warm Women: Gender Stereotypes and Backlash in Image Search Results , 2017, CHI.

[18]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  In Google We Trust: Users' Decisions on Rank, Position, and Relevance , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[19]  Laurie A. Rudman,et al.  Prescriptive Gender Stereotypes and Backlash Toward Agentic Women , 2001 .