Serendipity by Design? How to Turn from Diversity Exposure to Diversity Experience to Face Filter Bubbles in Social Media

Personalization of online content creates filter bubbles and reinforces echo chambers. These are driven not only by natural human behaviours but also by design choices and efficiency-driven recommender systems. The traditional media policy goal of exposing citizens to diverse information to protect pluralism has not found its concrete application on social media. As the usage of social media as a news source increases, as well as personalization’ sophistication and group polarization, there is a need for preventing audience fragmentation. The paper suggests serendipity as a potential design principle and, eventually, policy goal. Indeed, serendipity – considered both as a capability and a process of seeking and processing unexpected and valuable information – requires diverse information as a precondition and it causes cognitive diversity. Serendipity as a design principle might encompass fundamental phases of production and consumption of information, representing a positive freedom valuable from an epistemological, psychological and political perspective. With serendipity being both limited and cultivated in the digital environment, the research reveals a theoretical trade-off between relevance and serendipity (or unknown relevance) that might be tackled with serendipity-driven recommender systems and structural and informational nudging. Such approach could turn the media policy goal of exposing users to diverse information towards an experience of diversity that comes through an architecture for serendipity.

[1]  Hanan M. Asghar Measuring Information Seeking through Facebook: Scale development and initial evidence of Information Seeking in Facebook Scale (ISFS) , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Miguel Carvalhais,et al.  Regarding Value in Digital Serendipitous Interactions , 2016 .

[3]  Pedro M. Domingos,et al.  The Master Algorithm: How the Quest for the Ultimate Learning Machine Will Remake Our World , 2015 .

[4]  Abigail McBirnie,et al.  Seeking serendipity: the paradox of control , 2008, Aslib Proc..

[5]  Shuaiqiang Wang,et al.  A survey of serendipity in recommender systems , 2016, Knowl. Based Syst..

[6]  David Ellis,et al.  Serendipity and its study , 2014, J. Documentation.

[7]  Tao Sun,et al.  Unexpected Relevance: An Empirical Study of Serendipity in Retweets , 2013, ICWSM.

[8]  David G. Green The Serendipity Machine: A Voyage of Discovery Through the Unexpected World of Computers , 2004 .

[9]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  Tolerant Paternalism: Pro-ethical Design as a Resolution of the Dilemma of Toleration , 2016, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[10]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Encouraging Reading of Diverse Political Viewpoints with a Browser Widget , 2013, ICWSM.

[11]  Mark de Rond,et al.  The structure of serendipity , 2014 .

[12]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Value-sensitive design , 1996, INTR.

[13]  Mouzhi Ge,et al.  Beyond accuracy: evaluating recommender systems by coverage and serendipity , 2010, RecSys '10.

[14]  Mireille Hildebrandt,et al.  Legal Protection by Design: Objections and Refutations , 2011 .

[15]  Julita Vassileva,et al.  Understanding and controlling the filter bubble through interactive visualization: a user study , 2014, HT.

[16]  Bryan C. Semaan,et al.  Social media supporting political deliberation across multiple public spheres: towards depolarization , 2014, CSCW.

[17]  R. Nielsen,et al.  Are News Audiences Increasingly Fragmented? A Cross-National Comparative Analysis of Cross-Platform News Audience Fragmentation and Duplication , 2017 .

[18]  Diana C. Mutz,et al.  Online Groups and Political Discourse: Do Online Discussion Spaces Facilitate Exposure to Political Disagreement? , 2009 .

[19]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  The "Majority Illusion" in Social Networks , 2015, PloS one.

[20]  Chapin Wright Stumbling and sharing: Smartphones and serendipity in online news encounters , 2015 .

[21]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  Can you hear me now?: mitigating the echo chamber effect by source position indicators , 2014, CSCW.

[22]  Natali Helberger,et al.  Diversity by Design , 2011 .

[23]  C. Sunstein,et al.  Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures* , 2009 .

[24]  Thomas Hess,et al.  Escaping from the Filter Bubble? The Effects of Novelty and Serendipity on Users' Evaluations of Online Recommendations , 2014, ICIS.

[25]  Magdalena Wojcieszak,et al.  ‘Don’t talk to me’: effects of ideologically homogeneous online groups and politically dissimilar offline ties on extremism , 2010, New Media Soc..

[26]  Simon Colton,et al.  Modelling serendipity in a computational context , 2014, ArXiv.

[27]  Andrew Abbott,et al.  The Traditional Future: A Computational Theory of Library Research , 2008 .

[28]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Exposing Inconsistent Web Search Results with Bobble , 2014, PAM.

[29]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Coming across academic social media content serendipitously , 2012, ASIST.

[30]  Walter Quattrociocchi,et al.  Echo Chambers on Facebook , 2016 .

[31]  Christoph Lutz,et al.  Public Service Media in the Digital Age| Diversity by Choice: Applying a Social Cognitive Perspective to the Role of Public Service Media in the Digital Age , 2015 .

[32]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Discovery is never by chance: designing for (un)serendipity , 2009, C&C '09.

[33]  Sean M. McNee,et al.  Improving recommendation lists through topic diversification , 2005, WWW '05.

[34]  Nicholas Negroponte,et al.  Being Digital , 1995 .

[35]  K. O’Hara,et al.  Echo chambers and online radicalism: assessing the internet’s complicity in violent extremism , 2015 .

[36]  Juan Miguel Campanario,et al.  UsingCitation Classics to study the incidence of serendipity in scientific discovery , 1996, Scientometrics.

[37]  K. Williamson Discovered by chance: The role of incidental information acquisition in an ecological model of information use , 1998 .

[38]  Natali Helberger,et al.  Merely facilitating or actively stimulating diverse media choices? Public service media at the crossroad , 2015 .

[39]  Jonathan L. Herlocker,et al.  Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems , 2004, TOIS.

[40]  Stephen Linstead,et al.  Luck of the draw? Serendipity, accident, chance and misfortune in organization and design , 2014 .

[41]  Elaine G. Toms,et al.  Proposed facets of a serendipitous digital environment , 2013 .

[42]  Mireille Hildebrandt,et al.  The Challenges of Ambient Law and Legal Protection in the Profiling Era , 2010 .

[43]  Anton Pelinka Paul F. Lazarsfeld/Bernard Berelson/Hazel Gaudet: The People’s Choice – How the Voter makes up his Mind in a Presidential Campaign, Duell, Sloan and Pearce: New York 1944, XXXIII + 178 S. (dt. Wahlen und Wähler, Luchterhand: Neuwied/Berlin 1969, 231 S.) , 2016 .

[44]  Sandra Erdelez Information Encountering: It's More Than Just Bumping into Information , 2005 .

[45]  Eli Pariser,et al.  The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think , 2012 .

[46]  Julita Vassileva,et al.  Providing awareness, explanation and control of personalized filtering in a social networking site , 2016, Inf. Syst. Frontiers.

[47]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media , 2017 .

[48]  James J. Gibson,et al.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition , 2014 .

[49]  Tim Hussein,et al.  Choice-based preference elicitation for collaborative filtering recommender systems , 2014, CHI.

[50]  António Dias de Figueiredo,et al.  Programming for Serendipity , 2002 .

[51]  V. E. Bozdag,et al.  Values in the filter bubble Ethics of Personalization Algorithms in Cloud Computing , 2001 .

[52]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook , 2015, Science.

[53]  Stephann Makri,et al.  Observing serendipity in digital information environments , 2015, ASIST.

[54]  Toine Bogers,et al.  Micro-serendipity: Meaningful Coincidences in Everyday Life Shared on Twitter , 2013 .

[55]  Neil Thurman,et al.  THE FUTURE OF PERSONALIZATION AT NEWS WEBSITES , 2012 .

[56]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and Divide , 2009 .

[57]  G. Caldarelli,et al.  The spreading of misinformation online , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[58]  Jeroen van den Hoven,et al.  Breaking the filter bubble: democracy and design , 2015, Ethics and Information Technology.

[59]  Erik Duval,et al.  Context-Aware Recommender Systems for Learning: A Survey and Future Challenges , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[60]  M. Boden The creative mind : myths & mechanisms , 1991 .

[61]  Daniele Quercia,et al.  Auralist: introducing serendipity into music recommendation , 2012, WSDM '12.

[62]  Lucia D'Acunto,et al.  Exposure diversity as a design principle for recommender systems , 2018 .

[63]  Ethan Zuckerman,et al.  Rewire: Digital Cosmopolitans in the Age of Connection , 2013 .

[64]  Elinor G. Barber,et al.  The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity: A Study in Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science , 2004 .

[65]  Patrick L. Carr Serendipity in the Stacks: Libraries, Information Architecture, and the Problems of Accidental Discovery , 2015, Coll. Res. Libr..

[66]  Neil Thurman,et al.  Making ‘The Daily Me’: Technology, economics and habit in the mainstream assimilation of personalized news , 2011 .

[67]  Luciano Floridi,et al.  The Fourth Revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality , 2014 .