# A Trade-off-centered Framework of Content Moderation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.03450 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.03450/

## Key facts

- Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2022.

## Built on by (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [The "Colonial Impulse" of Natural Language Processing: An Audit of Bengali Sentiment Analysis Tools and Their Identity-based Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10535/) (2024)
- [Moderator: Moderating Text-to-Image Diffusion Models through Fine-grained Context-based Policies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.07728/) (2024)
- [Watch Your Language: Investigating Content Moderation with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.14517/) (2023)
- [Moderating Illicit Online Image Promotion for Unsafe User-Generated Content Games Using Large Vision-Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.18957/) (2024)
- [BiasX: "Thinking Slow" in Toxic Content Moderation with Explanations of Implied Social Biases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13589/) (2023)
- [Algorithmic Fairness: A Tolerance Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.09543/) (2024)
- [ARTiST: Automated Text Simplification for Task Guidance in Augmented Reality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18797/) (2024)
- [Safe Guard: an LLM-agent for Real-time Voice-based Hate Speech Detection in Social Virtual Reality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.15623/) (2024)
- [SafeGen: Embedding Ethical Safeguards in Text-to-Image Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.12501/) (2025)
- [Power Echoes: Investigating Moderation Biases in Online Power-Asymmetric Conflicts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.01457/) (2026)
- [Mod-Guide: An LLM-based Content Moderation Feedback System to Address Insensitive Speech toward Indigenous Ethnic and Religious Minority Communities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.13397/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Content moderation research typically prioritizes representing and addressing challenges for one group of stakeholders or communities in one type of context. While taking a focused approach is reasonable or even favorable for empirical case studies, it does not address how content moderation works in multiple contexts. Through a systematic literature review of 86 content moderation papers that document empirical studies, we seek to uncover patterns and tensions within past content moderation research. We find that content moderation can be characterized as a series of trade-offs around moderation actions, styles, philosophies, and values. We discuss how facilitating cooperation and preventing abuse, two key elements in Grimmelmann's definition of moderation, are inherently dialectical in practice. We close by showing how researchers, designers, and moderators can use our framework of trade-offs in their own work, and arguing that trade-offs should be of central importance in investigating and designing content moderation.