mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Closing the Loop: Testing ChatGPT to Generate Model Explanations to Improve Human Labelling of Sponsored Content on Social Media

arXiv 2306.05115 ↗First posted 8 Jun 2023cs.CL cs.SIcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Regulatory bodies worldwide are intensifying their efforts to ensure transparency in influencer marketing on social media through instruments like the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) in the European Union, or Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Yet enforcing these obligations has proven to be highly problematic due to the sheer scale of the influencer market. The task of automatically detecting sponsored content aims to enable the monitoring and enforcement of such regulations at scale. Current research in this field primarily frames this problem as a machine learning task, focusing on developing models that achieve high classification performance in detecting ads. These machine learning tasks rely on human data annotation to provide ground truth information. However, agreement between annotators is often low, leading to inconsistent labels that hinder the reliability of models. To improve annotation accuracy and, thus, the detection of sponsored content, we propose using chatGPT to augment the annotation process with phrases identified as relevant features and brief explanations. Our experiments show that this approach consistently improves inter-annotator agreement and annotation accuracy. Additionally, our survey of user experience in the annotation task indicates that the explanations improve the annotators' confidence and streamline the process. Our proposed methods can ultimately lead to more transparency and alignment with regulatory requirements in sponsored content detection.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2023.

Builds on

14 of 38 references.

References · 14

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  4. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  5. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  6. 2023ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Taskscited by 870
  7. 2019Are We Modeling the Task or the Annotator? An Investigation of Annotator Bias in Natural Language Understanding Datasetscited by 175
  8. 2020Directions in Abusive Language Training Data: Garbage In, Garbage Outcited by 140
  9. 2019Garbage In, Garbage Out? Do Machine Learning Application Papers in Social Computing Report Where Human-Labeled Training Data Comes From?cited by 64
  10. 2022"Help Me Help the AI": Understanding How Explainability Can Support Human-AI Interactioncited by 63
  11. 2021"Garbage In, Garbage Out" Revisited: What Do Machine Learning Application Papers Report About Human-Labeled Training Data?cited by 24
  12. 2018An Empirical Study of Affiliate Marketing Disclosures on YouTube and Pinterestcited by 10
2 more
  1. 2020Characterising and Detecting Sponsored Influencer Posts on Instagramcited by 7
  2. 2019Pluggable Social Artificial Intelligence for Enabling Human-Agent Teamingcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

9 papers.