USENIX Security2017Top-tier venue
Exploring User Perceptions of Discrimination in Online Targeted Advertising
Angelisa C. Plane, Elissa M. Redmiles, Michelle L. Mazurek, Michael Carl Tschantz
Abstract
Targeted online advertising now accounts for the largest share of the advertising market, beating out both TV and print ads. While targeted advertising can improve users' online shopping experiences, it can also have negative effects. A plethora of recent work has found evidence that in some cases, ads may be discriminatory, leading certain groups of users to see better offers (e.g., job ads) based on personal characteristics such as gender. To develop policies around advertising and guide advertisers in making ethical decisions, one thing we must better understand is what concerns users and why. In an effort to answer this question, we conducted a pilot study and a multi-step main survey (n=2,086 in total) presenting users with different discriminatory advertising scenarios. We find that overall, 44% of respondents were moderately or very concerned by the scenarios we presented. Respondents found the scenarios significantly more problematic when discrimination took place as a result of explicit demographic targeting rather than in response to online behavior. However, our respondents' opinions did not vary based on whether a human or an algorithm was responsible for the discrimination. These findings suggest that future policy documents should explicitly address discrimination in targeted advertising, no matter its origin, as a significant user concern, and that corporate responses that blame the algorithmic nature of the ad ecosystem may not be helpful for addressing public concerns.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext ab28aac3-b980-484c-9e49-cd126ef797a5Cited by top-tier papers18
- Oh, the Places You've Been! User Reactions to Longitudinal Transparency About Third-Party Web Tracking and InferencingBen Weinshel, Miranda Wei, Mainack Mondal, Euirim Choi et al.CCS 2019 · 73 citations
- Measuring Non-Expert Comprehension of Machine Learning Fairness MetricsDebjani Saha, Candice Schumann, Duncan C. McElfresh, John P. Dickerson et al.ICML 2020 · 71 citations
- Investigating Ad Transparency Mechanisms in Social Media: A Case Study of Facebooks ExplanationsAthanasios Andreou, Giridhari Venkatadri, Oana Goga, Krishna P. Gummadi et al.NDSS 2018 · 68 citations
- Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-MakingJakob Schoeffer, Maria De-Arteaga, Niklas KühlCHI 2024 · 67 citations
- What Makes a "Bad" Ad? User Perceptions of Problematic Online AdvertisingEric Zeng, Tadayoshi Kohno, Franziska RoesnerCHI 2021 · 55 citations
Related papers
- Problematic Advertising and its Disparate Exposure on FacebookMuhammad Ali, Angelica Goetzen, Alan Mislove, Elissa M. Redmiles et al.USENIX Security 2023
- When and Why Do People Want Ad Targeting Explanations? Evidence from a Four-Week, Mixed-Methods Field StudyHao-Ping (Hank) Lee, Jacob Logas, Stephanie S. Yang, Zhouyu Li et al.S&P 2023
- Characterizing the Usability and Usefulness of U.S. Ad Transparency SystemsKevin Bryson, Arthur Borem, Phoebe Moh, Omer Akgul et al.S&P 2025
- Auditing for Discrimination in Algorithms Delivering Job AdsBasileal Imana, Aleksandra Korolova, John S. HeidemannWWW 2021 · 105 citations
- Exploring the Online Micro-targeting Practices of Small, Medium, and Large BusinessesSalim Chouaki, Islem Bouzenia, Oana Goga, Beatrice RoussillonCSCW 2022 · 11 citations
