Systemization of Knowledge (SoK): Human-Centered AI Safety for Youth

Key Findings

• — 750 records from CHI, CSCW, DIS, FAccT, AIES, IEEE S&P, USENIX Security and SOUPS were identified, 735 screened after de-duplication, and 100 empirical studies included.
• — 36 risks were observed across nine categories (behavioural and social development, mental wellbeing, toxicity, misuse and exploitation, bias, privacy, control and agency, usability and exclusion, system reliability).
• — Of 80 risk-countermeasure links, 40 (50%) were supported only by proposed countermeasures and 14 (18%) by evaluated ones; five of the 36 risks (14%) had no identified countermeasure.
• — YAIR risks with no empirical evidence in the corpus include extremist content, financial exploitation, disordered-eating content and long-term developmental effects.
• — Countermeasures cluster at the microsystem (parental controls, family agreements) and the exosystem (classifiers, guardrails); the mesosystem linking home, school, peers, platforms and services was nearly empty.
• — The authors argue that age-appropriate-design limits on engagement nudges may need to extend from interface nudges to relational nudges produced through a system's language, personality and simulated emotions.

Methodology Notes

Single-screener title and abstract screening by the first author with full-text consultation for borderline cases; structured extraction per paper (year, venue, technology, method, population, risks, countermeasures, countermeasure stage) distinguishing observed, participant-reported, author-anticipated and literature-attributed claims. Limitations stated by the authors: English-language work in HCI and security venues only, under-representing clinical, legal, industry and platform-safety research. Preprint v1 submitted 2026-10-06; not peer reviewed. Verified on the arXiv abstract page and the HTML full text (affiliations, search counts, the stage matrix and the uncovered-risk list read from the text).

Sources