Jeremy Foote

Jeremy Foote

@jeremydfoote.com

Computational social scientist; assistant professor @ Purdue; I study how people self-organize in online communities and how we can make them work better.

1K followers756 following257 posts

Pinned

Hi folks! I'm Jeremy, I study online communities. A bunch of my work has been on new and small communities and recently I've been doing some stuff on how AI agents can help communities work better.

I am hoping to recruit new PhD student(s) to come to Purdue and work with me! I study the evolution and influence of online communities. I'm also interested in the social implications of AI, especially for online communities, collaboration, and social cognition.

communitydata.science@communitydata.science

"Prospective PhD Student Q&A – October 2, 2026" (new blog post): blog.communitydata.science/prospective-...

I consider myself a computational communication scholar / computational social scientist, but my students and I use qualitative methods and experiments and surveys as well as large-scale data analyses.

For over a year now, I have been annoyed by this problem with my e-reader. The pen sometimes stopped working correctly, usually near an edge, but often a different edge. I had googled some without luck and finally asked AI about it. Right away it suggested it might be a magnet, like on the case!

Our new JCMC paper - led by Hsuen-Chi Chiu - looks at privacy attitudes when chatting with AI companions. Based on interviews with 15 chatbot users, we argue that there is a paradox - people trust their AI friends but distrust the corporations that run them! academic.oup.com/jcmc/article...

academic.oup.comChatting with confidants or corporations? Privacy management with AI companionsAbstract. AI companion chatbots feel like intimate confidants but exist as part of corporate data systems. Drawing on Communication Privacy Management (CPM
View full thread

However, some participants talked about being more willing to share fairly private things with chatbots than humans. In part, this was because bots are not connected to human social networks. No matter what you tell them, they can't spread rumors or gossip.

I'm so glad that Hsuen-Chi Chiu invited me to work on this with her. I think that AI companions are a really, really important space to understand and I'm looking forward to doing and reading more research in this area.

Our new JCMC paper - led by Hsuen-Chi Chiu - looks at privacy attitudes when chatting with AI companions. Based on interviews with 15 chatbot users, we argue that there is a paradox - people trust their AI friends but distrust the corporations that run them! academic.oup.com/jcmc/article...

academic.oup.comChatting with confidants or corporations? Privacy management with AI companionsAbstract. AI companion chatbots feel like intimate confidants but exist as part of corporate data systems. Drawing on Communication Privacy Management (CPM
View full thread

For chatbots, that isn't an option, as any communication with the AI has to occur through the platform, changing this privacy calculus. Our participants took steps to mitigate some of these risks, such as using pseudonyms when talking about others or not share PII.

Our new JCMC paper - led by Hsuen-Chi Chiu - looks at privacy attitudes when chatting with AI companions. Based on interviews with 15 chatbot users, we argue that there is a paradox - people trust their AI friends but distrust the corporations that run them! academic.oup.com/jcmc/article...

academic.oup.comChatting with confidants or corporations? Privacy management with AI companionsAbstract. AI companion chatbots feel like intimate confidants but exist as part of corporate data systems. Drawing on Communication Privacy Management (CPM

Chatbots represent a unique situation - like in human-human relationships, users have to manage the tension of disclosure - we have to disclose to receive support, but it also makes us vulnerable.

Jeremy Foote reposted

Jeremy Foote reposted

It’s truly astonishing to see how comprehensively the US government is tearing down every part of the system that has made it up until now a world-leading power in science, research, and technological development. The entire world will suffer from this wanton destruction.

Dan Vergano@danvergano.bsky.social

White House proposes new rules giving political appointees final approval of research grants These proposed Office of Management and Budget regulations would render the federal research grant review process opaque www.scientificamerican.com/article/whit...

One of the worst things about being a professor right now is not being able to fully celebrate great work by students without suspecting they used an LLM.

Jeremy Foote reposted

FWIW, I don’t think the major problem in my field, or related ones, is that people need to move faster & produce more. I read a lot of papers as part of the job, and I’m increasingly convinced we’d benefit from fewer papers and better ones, not more mediocre work produced ever more “efficiently.”

Jeremy Foote reposted

One thing that galls me about AI slop is the total reign of disingenuousness. A person "wrote" a detailed, impassioned appeal of their terrible AI slop paper's rejection. I explained why it was rejected. /1

View full thread

On the other hand, I've found that writing with an LLM (e.g., with Copilot) can also spark new ideas or ways of thinking about something. So far, I think that my reservations are mostly ethical/moral, but in an uncomfortable way.

We are developing new social norms and there's a bit of a feeling of being morally unmoored while they solidify. My strong suspicion is that it will be totally normal to have AI do most academic writing, just as it's quickly becoming acceptable to use Claude Code or similar. Thoughts?

And I think the main reason is that it *feels* like cheating. I think that it's likely that by integrating LLMs more into my process I could write better, clearer, and certainly faster. There are certainly downsides to this - e.g., the process of writing helps to clarify thinking and spawn new ides

New paper! Conversations with AI chatbots have been shown to be persuasive across a bunch of contexts. However, most of these studies are short-term and track only changes in attitudes or beliefs. ...

View full thread

The open source GitHub project is at: github.com/jdfoote/Redd... We (with @lbitsiko.bsky.social, Hitesh Goel, and @kumarde.bsky.social) hope that this paper and library make it much easier for others to pursue this kind of research. Contributions and pull requests to the project are very welcome!

github.comGitHub - jdfoote/Reddit-Conversation-Laboratory: Software to enable LLM conversation testing with Reddit usersSoftware to enable LLM conversation testing with Reddit users - jdfoote/Reddit-Conversation-Laboratory

New paper! Conversations with AI chatbots have been shown to be persuasive across a bunch of contexts. However, most of these studies are short-term and track only changes in attitudes or beliefs. ...

We wanted to look at the long-term impact of chatbot conversations on behaviors, so we built the Reddit Conversation Library. This is a set of software tools designed to do conversational AI field experiments.

It recruits and consents Reddit users, assigns them to conditions, manages and store their conversations with chatbots, and tracks their public behavior before and after the intervention. This allows researchers to track longer-term changes to behavior in a real-life setting.

Jeremy Foote reposted

Replying to @tedunderwood.com

Yes absolutely. And in particular, we desperately need social scientists in the middle of testing and publishing on these methodological questions, for all the reasons Phil and Jeff outline. This is too consequential to leave to CS.

Jeremy Foote reposted

I'm begging my fellow politicians, Illinoisans, and Americans to realize that right now, we aren't fighting over policy or political party. We're fighting over whether we're going to be a country rooted in empathy and kindness — or one rooted in cruelty and rage.