arXiv preprint ·
Whose Transparency is it Anyway? Understanding Generative AI Transparency Needs and Gaps Across Stakeholders
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Transparency has become a central principle in AI governance, yet there is little agreement about what transparency means, for whom, and in what contexts. Drawing on interpretive flexibility within the Social Construction of Technology, this paper examines how different stakeholders understand and experience transparency in generative AI. This study draws from a global survey of 400 end-users, AI builders, and policymakers, complemented by a structured focus group with end-users, grounding the quantitative findings in qualitative insights from the group most underserved by current transparency practice. We present three key findings. First, all three groups share similar understandings of what transparency means and what it should afford, centered on ensuring accuracy and privacy. Second, gaps between the importance of transparency features and their perceived availability are substantially larger for end-users than builders, revealing how power shapes what gets built and who it serves. Only 28% of end-users report that current transparency practices reflect their needs very well, compared to 53% of builders and 49% of policymakers. Third, transparency is situationally constructed, priorities shift with context and task structure, with role-specific frames activating when context demands them and receding when it does not. We argue that meaningful AI transparency requires moving beyond a one-size-fits-all solution, including current emphases on AI disclosure and static documentation, toward pluralistic transparency infrastructures that reflect the needs of diverse users and stakeholders.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Swapping the Judge Changes the Ranking: A Preregistered Study of Cross-Provider Replication in LLM-Judged System Comparisons
Sure Enough to Share? Overconfidence in GenAI Video Discernment is Associated with Sharing Intentions
Palimpsestic Accountability in the US Federal AI Inventories
Thick Alignment: A Social Framework for Values and AI Systems
From Guidelines to Practice: Defining Requirements for AI Red-Teaming Tools
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.