BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Jonathan Bright

Jonathan Bright contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
cs.CYSocial and Information Networksphysics.soc-phApplicationsData Structures and AlgorithmsMathematical Softwarephysics.comp-phphysics.data-anSoftware Engineering

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
9topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2024arXiv

Generative AI is already widespread in the public sector

Generative AI has the potential to transform how public services are delivered by enhancing productivity and reducing time spent on bureaucracy. Furthermore, unlike other types of artificial intelligence, it is a technology that has quickly become widely available for bottom-up adoption: essentially anyone can decide to make use of it in their day to day work. But to what extent is generative AI already in use in the public sector? Our survey of 938 public service professionals within the UK (covering education, health, social work and emergency services) seeks to answer this question. We find that use of generative AI systems is already widespread: 45% of respondents were aware of generative AI usage within their area of work, while 22% actively use a generative AI system. Public sector professionals were positive about both current use of the technology and its potential to enhance their efficiency and reduce bureaucratic workload in the future. For example, those working in the NHS thought that time spent on bureaucracy could drop from 50% to 30% if generative AI was properly exploited, an equivalent of one day per week (an enormous potential impact). Our survey also found a high amount of trust (61%) around generative AI outputs, and a low fear of replacement (16%). While respondents were optimistic overall, areas of concern included feeling like the UK is missing out on opportunities to use AI to improve public services (76%), and only a minority of respondents (32%) felt like there was clear guidance on generative AI usage in their workplaces. In other words, it is clear that generative AI is already transforming the public sector, but uptake is happening in a disorganised fashion without clear guidelines. The UK's public sector urgently needs to develop more systematic methods for taking advantage of the technology.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2024arXiv

Understanding engagement with platform safety technology for reducing exposure to online harms

User facing 'platform safety technology' encompasses an array of tools offered by platforms to help people protect themselves from harm, for example allowing people to report content and unfollow or block other users. These tools are an increasingly important part of online safety: in the UK, legislation has made it a requirement for large platforms to offer them. However, little is known about user engagement with such tools. We present findings from a nationally representative survey of UK adults covering their awareness of and experiences with seven common safety technologies. We show that experience of online harms is widespread, with 67% of people having seen what they perceived as harmful content online; 26% of people have also had at least one piece of content removed by content moderation. Use of safety technologies is also high, with more than 80\% of people having used at least one. Awareness of specific tools is varied, with people more likely to be aware of 'post-hoc' safety tools, such as reporting, than preventative measures. However, satisfaction with safety technologies is generally low. People who have previously seen online harms are more likely to use safety tools, implying a 'learning the hard way' route to engagement. Those higher in digital literacy are also more likely to use some of these tools, raising concerns about the accessibility of these technologies to all users. Additionally, women are more likely to engage in particular types of online 'safety work'. We discuss the implications of our results for those seeking a safer online environment.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

How do climate change skeptics engage with opposing views? Understanding mechanisms of social identity and cognitive dissonance in an online forum

Does engagement with opposing views help break down ideological `echo chambers'; or does it backfire and reinforce them? This question remains critical as academics, policymakers and activists grapple with the question of how to regulate political discussion on social media. In this study, we contribute to the debate by examining the impact of opposing views within a major climate change skeptic online community on Reddit. A large sample of posts (N = 3000) was manually coded as either dissonant or consonant which allowed the automated classification of the full dataset of more than 50,000 posts, with codes inferred from linked websites. We find that ideologically dissonant submissions act as a stimulant to activity in the community: they received more attention (comments) than consonant submissions, even though they received lower scores through up-voting and down-voting. Users who engaged with dissonant submissions were also more likely to return to the forum. Consistent with identity theory, confrontation with opposing views triggered activity in the forum, particularly among users that are highly engaged with the community. In light of the findings, theory of social identity and echo chambers is discussed and enhanced.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Echo Chambers Exist! (But They're Full of Opposing Views)

The theory of echo chambers, which suggests that online political discussions take place in conditions of ideological homogeneity, has recently gained popularity as an explanation for patterns of political polarization and radicalization observed in many democratic countries. However, while micro-level experimental work has shown evidence that individuals may gravitate towards information that supports their beliefs, recent macro-level studies have cast doubt on whether this tendency generates echo chambers in practice, instead suggesting that cross-cutting exposures are a common feature of digital life. In this article, we offer an explanation for these diverging results. Building on cognitive dissonance theory, and making use of observational trace data taken from an online white nationalist website, we explore how individuals in an ideological 'echo chamber' engage with opposing viewpoints. We show that this type of exposure, far from being detrimental to radical online discussions, is actually a core feature of such spaces that encourages people to stay engaged. The most common 'echoes' in this echo chamber are in fact the sound of opposing viewpoints being undermined and marginalized. Hence echo chambers exist not only in spite of but thanks to the unifying presence of oppositional viewpoints. We conclude with reflections on policy implications of our study for those seeking to promote a more moderate political internet.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

SciPy 1.0--Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python

SciPy is an open source scientific computing library for the Python programming language. SciPy 1.0 was released in late 2017, about 16 years after the original version 0.1 release. SciPy has become a de facto standard for leveraging scientific algorithms in the Python programming language, with more than 600 unique code contributors, thousands of dependent packages, over 100,000 dependent repositories, and millions of downloads per year. This includes usage of SciPy in almost half of all machine learning projects on GitHub, and usage by high profile projects including LIGO gravitational wave analysis and creation of the first-ever image of a black hole (M87). The library includes functionality spanning clustering, Fourier transforms, integration, interpolation, file I/O, linear algebra, image processing, orthogonal distance regression, minimization algorithms, signal processing, sparse matrix handling, computational geometry, and statistics. In this work, we provide an overview of the capabilities and development practices of the SciPy library and highlight some recent technical developments.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Wikipedia traffic data and electoral prediction: towards theoretically informed models

This aim of this article is to explore the potential use of Wikipedia page view data for predicting electoral results. Responding to previous critiques of work using socially generated data to predict elections, which have argued that these predictions take place without any understanding of the mechanism which enables them, we first develop a theoretical model which highlights why people might seek information online at election time, and how this activity might relate to overall electoral outcomes, focussing especially on how different types of parties such as new and established parties might generate different information seeking patterns. We test this model on a novel dataset drawn from a variety of countries in the 2009 and 2014 European Parliament elections. We show that while Wikipedia offers little insight into absolute vote outcomes, it offers a good information about changes in both overall turnout at elections and in vote share for particular parties. These results are used to enhance existing theories about the drivers of aggregate patterns in online information seeking.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Can electoral popularity be predicted using socially generated big data?

Today, our more-than-ever digital lives leave significant footprints in cyberspace. Large scale collections of these socially generated footprints, often known as big data, could help us to re-investigate different aspects of our social collective behaviour in a quantitative framework. In this contribution we discuss one such possibility: the monitoring and predicting of popularity dynamics of candidates and parties through the analysis of socially generated data on the web during electoral campaigns. Such data offer considerable possibility for improving our awareness of popularity dynamics. However they also suffer from significant drawbacks in terms of representativeness and generalisability. In this paper we discuss potential ways around such problems, suggesting the nature of different political systems and contexts might lend differing levels of predictive power to certain types of data source. We offer an initial exploratory test of these ideas, focussing on two data streams, Wikipedia page views and Google search queries. On the basis of this data, we present popularity dynamics from real case examples of recent elections in three different countries.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access