Tricky vs. Transparent: Towards an Ecologically Valid and Safe Approach for Evaluating Online Safety Nudges for Teens
Zainab Agha, Jinkyung Park, Ruyuan Wan, Naima Samreen Ali, Yiwei Wang, Dominic DiFranzo, Karla Badillo-Urquiola, Pamela Wiśniewski
Abstract
HCI research has been at the forefront of designing interventions for protecting teens online; yet, how can we test and evaluate these solutions without endangering the youth we aim to protect? Towards this goal, we conducted focus groups with 20 teens to inform the design of a social media simulation platform and study for evaluating online safety nudges co-designed with teens. Participants evaluated risk scenarios, personas, platform features, and our research design to provide insight regarding the ecological validity of these artifacts. Teens expected risk scenarios to be subtle and tricky, while also higher in risk to be believable. The teens iterated on the nudges to prioritize risk prevention without reducing autonomy, risk coping, and community accountability. For the simulation, teens recommended using transparency with some deceit to balance realism and respect for participants. Our meta-level research provides a teen-centered action plan to evaluate online safety interventions safely and effectively.