Human-AI Interaction

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

24 papers in the last four weeks, up 41% on the four weeks before. 0.2% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 211

Apr 22, 2026cs.HC

AgentLens: Adaptive Visual Modalities for Human-Agent Interaction in Mobile GUI Agents

Mobile GUI agents can automate smartphone tasks by interacting directly with app interfaces, but how they should communicate with users during execution remains underexplored. Existing systems rely on two extremes: foreground execution, which maximizes transparency but prevents multitasking, and background execution, which supports multitasking but provides little visual awareness. Through iterative formative studies, we found that users prefer a hybrid model with just-in-time visual interaction, but the most effective visualization modality depends on the task. Motivated by this, we present AgentLens, a mobile GUI agent that adaptively uses three visual modalities during human-agent interaction: Full UI, Partial UI, and GenUI. AgentLens extends a standard mobile agent with adaptive communication actions and uses Virtual Display to enable background execution with selective visual overlays. In a controlled study with 21 participants, AgentLens was preferred by 85.7% of participants and achieved the highest usability (1.94 Overall PSSUQ) and adoption-intent (6.43/7).

Jeonghyeon Kim, Byeongjun Joung, Junwon Lee +3

Department of Computer Science and Engineering Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU) Suwon, Republic of Korea

Mobile GUI Automation Computer-Use Agents GUI Agents Human-AI Interaction Mobile GUI Agents

Apr 21, 2026cs.CY

Frictionless Love: Associations Between AI Companion Roles and Behavioral Addiction

AI companion chatbots increasingly shape how people seek social and emotional connection, sometimes substituting for relationships with romantic partners, friends, teachers, or even therapists. When these systems adopt those metaphorical roles, they are not neutral: such roles structure people's ways of interacting, distribute perceived AI harms and benefits, and may reflect behavioral addiction signs. Yet these role-dependent risks remain poorly understood. We analyze 248,830 posts from seven prominent Reddit communities describing interactions with AI companions. We identify ten recurring metaphorical roles (for example, soulmate, philosopher, and coach) and show that each role supports distinct ways of interacting. We then extract the perceived AI harms and AI benefits associated with these role-specific interactions and link them to behavioral addiction signs, all of which has been inferred from the text in the posts. AI soulmate companions are associated with romance-centered ways of interacting, offering emotional support but also introducing emotional manipulation and distress, culminating in strong attachment. In contrast, AI coach and guardian companions are associated with practical benefits such as personal growth and task support, yet are nonetheless more frequently associated with behavioral addiction signs such as daily life disruptions and damage to offline relationships. These findings show that metaphorical roles are a central ethical design concern for responsible AI companions.

Vibhor Agarwal, Ke Zhou, Edyta Paulina Bogucka +1

Nokia Bell Labs, Cambridge, United Kingdom · Nokia Bell Labs , Cambridge, United Kingdom · University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom +1

AI Companions Human-AI Interaction Responsible AI

Apr 21, 2026cs.CL

Talking to a Know-It-All GPT or a Second-Guesser Claude? How Repair reveals unreliable Multi-Turn Behavior in LLMs

Repair, an important resource for resolving trouble in human-human conversation, remains underexplored in human-LLM interaction. In this study, we investigate how LLMs engage in the interactive process of repair in multi-turn dialogues around solvable and unsolvable math questions. We examine whether models initiate repair themselves and how they respond to user-initiated repair. Our results show strong differences across models: reactions range from being almost completely resistant to (appropriate) repair attempts to being highly susceptible and easily manipulated. We further demonstrate that once conversations extend beyond a single turn, model behavior becomes more distinctive and less predictable across systems. Overall, our findings indicate that each tested LLM exhibits its own characteristic form of unreliability in the context of repair.

Clara Lachenmaier, Hannah Bultmann, Sina Zarrieß

Computational Linguistics, Department of Linguistics Bielefeld University, Germany

LLM Self-Correction Human-AI Interaction LLM Reliability Conversational Agents

Apr 20, 2026cs.HC

Choose Your Own Adventure: Non-Linear AI-Assisted Programming with EvoGraph

Current AI-assisted programming tools are predominantly linear and chat-based, which deviates from the iterative and branching nature of programming itself. Our preliminary study with developers using AI assistants suggested that they often struggle to explore alternatives, manage prompting sequences, and trace changes. Informed by these insights, we created EvoGraph, an IDE plugin that integrates AI interactions and code changes as a lightweight and interactive development graph. EvoGraph automatically records a branching AI-assisted coding history and allows developers to manipulate the graph to compare, merge, and revisit prior collaborative AI programming states. Our user study with 20 participants revealed that EvoGraph addressed developers' challenges identified in our preliminary study while imposing lower cognitive load. Participants also found the graph-based representation supported safe exploration, efficient iteration, and reflection on AI-generated changes. Our work highlights design opportunities for tools to help developers make sense of and act on their problem-solving progress in the emerging AI-mediated programming context.

Vassilios Exarhakos, Jinghui Cheng, Jin L. C. Guo

McGill University Montreal, Quebec, Canada · Polytechnique Montreal Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration AI-Assisted Software Development

Apr 20, 2026cs.CL

IceBreaker for Conversational Agents: Breaking the First-Message Barrier with Personalized Starters

Conversational agents, such as ChatGPT and Doubao, have become essential daily assistants for billions of users. To further enhance engagement, these systems are evolving from passive responders to proactive companions. However, existing efforts focus on activation within ongoing dialogues, while overlooking a key real-world bottleneck. In the conversation initiation stage, users may have a vague need but no explicit query intent, creating a first-message barrier where the conversation holds before it begins. To overcome this, we introduce Conversation Starter Generation: generating personalized starters to guide users into conversation. However, unlike in-conversation stages where immediate context guides the response, initiation must operate in a cold-start moment without explicit user intent. To pioneer in this direction, we present IceBreaker that frames human ice-breaking as a two-step handshake: (i) evoke resonance via Resonance-Aware Interest Distillation from session summaries to capture trigger interests, and (ii) stimulate interaction via Interaction-Oriented Starter Generation, optimized with personalized preference alignment and a self-reinforced loop to maximize engagement. Online A/B tests on one of the world's largest conversational agent products show that IceBreaker improves user active days by +0.184% and click-through rate by +9.425%, and has been deployed in production.

Hongwei Zheng, Weiqi Wu, Zhengjia Wang +6

ByteDance

Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents Text Generation

Apr 20, 2026cs.HC

The Collaboration Gap in Human-AI Work

LLMs are increasingly presented as collaborators in programming, design, writing, and analysis. Yet the practical experience of working with them often falls short of this promise. In many settings, users must diagnose misunderstandings, reconstruct missing assumptions, and repeatedly repair misaligned responses. This poster introduces a conceptual framework for understanding why such collaboration remains fragile. Drawing on a constructivist grounded theory analysis of 16 interviews with designers, developers, and applied AI practitioners working on LLM-enabled systems, and informed by literature on human-AI collaboration, we argue that stable collaboration depends not only on model capability but on the interaction's grounding conditions. We distinguish three recurrent structures of human-AI work: one-shot assistance, weak collaboration with asymmetric repair, and grounded collaboration. We propose that collaboration breaks down when the appearance of partnership outpaces the grounding capacity of the interaction and contribute a framework for discussing grounding, repair, and interaction structure in LLM-enabled work.

Varad Vishwarupe, Marina Jirotka, Nigel Shadbolt +1

University of Oxford, United Kingdom

LLM Grounding Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 19, 2026cs.HC

Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF): Agent Identity Design as a Collaboration Interface in Multi-Agent Systems

As AI systems evolve from single agents to multi-agent architectures, a critical design dimension has been overlooked: how the social identity of individual agents shapes human behavior within the collaboration. This paper introduces the Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF), a theoretical framework extending Social Affordance theory to multi-agent AI systems. We propose that agent identity design functions as a collaboration interface--structuring how users perceive and engage with each agent, and thereby influencing Human-Agent collaboration outcomes. ASAF adopts the analytical separability of the social affordance layer and the engineering orchestration layer as a framing assumption--an organizing distinction that structures design analysis--rather than a testable claim about effect-independence. ASAF comprises three mechanisms: Identity Signaling, Behavioral Priming, and Collaborative Governance, and specifies their boundary conditions through a four-tier Identity Signal Fidelity Spectrum and an individual-difference moderating variable (anthropomorphizing vs. instrumentalizing cognitive style). We situate ASAF relative to affordance theory (Hutchby, 2001), the CASA paradigm (Gambino et al., 2020), and classical multi-agent systems research (Wooldridge & Jennings, 1995), identifying a directional reversal: where classical MAS used roles, norms, and coordination to constrain autonomous agents, ASAF applies the same organizational vocabulary to structure the cognition and oversight of human operators who remain in the loop. ASAF positions social affordance design as a first-class design responsibility that engineering orchestration cannot subsume. We outline directions for empirical validation, including a factorial design characterizing the empirical interaction surface between the social affordance and engineering orchestration layers.

Meng-Han Lee

Independent Researcher, Taipei, Taiwan

Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Interaction Multi-Agent Systems Human-AI Collaboration Agentic AI

Apr 18, 2026cs.HC

The Instrumental Dissolution of Typing: Why AI Challenges the Keyboard Era in Knowledge Work

For four decades, the QWERTY keyboard organized white-collar knowledge work. Typing's dominance was instrumental, not cognitively necessary. As multimodal AI achieves human-parity understanding of speech and gesture, this necessity dissolves. We introduce instrumental dissolution -- loss of institutional-default status while persisting in specialist niches. The keyboard era ends not through hardware replacement but through migration of its function into AI systems. The central contribution identifies the verification bottleneck: as AI collapses production friction, the primary constraint shifts from generation to evaluation. Knowledge workers become adversarial auditors rather than keystroke-producers. This restructures professional expertise, organizational communication, and how productive labor is recognized. Converging evidence from history, philosophy, neuroscience, technology, organizational studies, and cultural analysis supports this thesis. We map synthetic literacy -- oral input generating literate output -- as the defining feature of this transition. Under three scenarios (optimistic: 2028-2035; base: 2035-2045; pessimistic: 2045-2060), we specify disconfirmation criteria that would weaken the thesis if observed. We propose seven interface primitives operationalizing verification-centered HCI.

Wei Roy Hua

8T5 Innovations

Human-AI Interaction Human Oversight of AI Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 18, 2026cs.CY

The Reliance Negotiation Framework: A Dynamic Process Model of Student LLM Engagement in Academic Writing

Student engagement with large language models (LLMs) in academic writing is not a stable trait, an adoption decision, or a competency level; it is a continuously negotiated process that existing frameworks cannot adequately theorize. Typological models provide categories without mechanisms; technology acceptance models explain adoption but not post-adoption quality; AI literacy frameworks treat competency as a static predictor rather than a live input. None accounts for within-student variability across tasks, the developmental paradox whereby experience produces habituation rather than sophistication, or principled non-use as a form of ethical reasoning. This article introduces the Reliance Negotiation Framework (RNF), developed from a sequential explanatory mixed-methods study of 382 undergraduates at a public minority-serving institution in the United States (survey, N = 382; 14 semi-structured interviews; three qualitative survey strands; 1,435 coded instances). The RNF reconceptualizes LLM reliance as an ongoing negotiation among four concurrent inputs (perceived benefits, perceived risks, ethical commitments, and situational demands) with outputs that recursively modify subsequent decisions. A Two-Model Architecture accommodates the 13.0% of participants whose categorical ethical commitments foreclose negotiation entirely. The framework generates four falsifiable predictions with implications for AI literacy pedagogy, academic integrity policy, and equity-centered practice at minority-serving institutions.

Shahin Hossain

Department of Language, Literacy and Culture University of Maryland, Baltimore County Baltimore, MD 21250, USA

Human-AI Interaction

Apr 17, 2026cs.CL

Imperfectly Cooperative Human-AI Interactions: Comparing the Impacts of Human and AI Attributes in Simulated and User Studies

AI design characteristics and human personality traits each impact the quality and outcomes of human-AI interactions. However, their relative and joint impacts are underexplored in imperfectly cooperative scenarios, where people and AI only have partially aligned goals and objectives. This study compares a purely simulated dataset comprising 2,000 simulations and a parallel human subjects experiment involving 290 human participants to investigate these effects across two scenario categories: (1) hiring negotiations between human job candidates and AI hiring agents; and (2) human-AI transactions wherein AI agents may conceal information to maximize internal goals. We examine user Extraversion and Agreeableness alongside AI design characteristics, including Adaptability, Expertise, and chain-of-thought Transparency. Our causal discovery analysis extends performance-focused evaluations by integrating scenario-based outcomes, communication analysis, and questionnaire measures. Results reveal divergences between purely simulated and human study datasets, and between scenario types. In simulation experiments, personality traits and AI attributes were comparatively influential. Yet, with actual human subjects, AI attributes -- particularly transparency -- were much more impactful. We discuss how these divergences vary across different interaction contexts, offering crucial insights for the future of human-centered AI agents.

Myke C. Cohen, Mingqian Zheng, Neel Bhandari +6

Aptima, Inc. · Arizona State University · Carnegie Mellon University

Human-AI Interaction

Apr 16, 2026cs.HC

CoGrid & the Multi-User Gymnasium: A Framework for Multi-Agent Experimentation

The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in everyday life brings with it new challenges and questions for regarding how humans interact with autonomous agents. Multi-agent experiments, where humans and AI act together, can offer important opportunities to study social decision making, but there is a lack of accessible tooling available to researchers to run such experiments. We introduce two tools designed to reduce these barriers. The first, CoGrid, is a multi-agent grid-based simulation library with dual NumPy and JAX backends. The second, Multi-User Gymnasium (MUG), translates such simulation environments directly into interactive web-based experiments. MUG supports interactions with arbitrary numbers of humans and AI, utilizing either server-authoritative or peer-to-peer networking with rollback netcode to account for latency. Together, these tools can enable researchers to deploy studies of human-AI interaction, facilitating inquiry into core questions of psychology, cognition, and decision making and their relationship to human-AI interaction. Both tools are open source and available to the broader research community. Documentation and source code is available at {cogrid, multi-user-gymnasium}.readthedocs.io. This paper details the functionality of these tools and presents several case studies to illustrate their utility in human-AI multi-agent experimentation.

Chase McDonald, Cleotilde Gonzalez

Department of Social and Decision Sciences · Carnegie Mellon University

Human-AI Interaction Multi-Agent Systems Human-AI Collaboration

Apr 16, 2026cs.AI

The LLM Fallacy: Misattribution in AI-Assisted Cognitive Workflows

The rapid integration of large language models (LLMs) into everyday workflows has transformed how individuals perform cognitive tasks such as writing, programming, analysis, and multilingual communication. While prior research has focused on model reliability, hallucination, and user trust calibration, less attention has been given to how LLM usage reshapes users' perceptions of their own capabilities. This paper introduces the LLM fallacy, a cognitive attribution error in which individuals misinterpret LLM-assisted outputs as evidence of their own independent competence, producing a systematic divergence between perceived and actual capability. We argue that the opacity, fluency, and low-friction interaction patterns of LLMs obscure the boundary between human and machine contribution, leading users to infer competence from outputs rather than from the processes that generate them. We situate the LLM fallacy within existing literature on automation bias, cognitive offloading, and human-AI collaboration, while distinguishing it as a form of attributional distortion specific to AI-mediated workflows. We propose a conceptual framework of its underlying mechanisms and a typology of manifestations across computational, linguistic, analytical, and creative domains. Finally, we examine implications for education, hiring, and AI literacy, and outline directions for empirical validation. We also provide a transparent account of human-AI collaborative methodology. This work establishes a foundation for understanding how generative AI systems not only augment cognitive performance but also reshape self-perception and perceived expertise.

Hyunwoo Kim, Harin Yu, Hanau Yi

ddai Inc.

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration Cognitive Offloading

Mar 31, 2026cs.CL

CounselReflect: Opportunities and Challenges for Designing Tools to Support Self-Reflection on Mental Health and Well-Being Conversations with AI

AI is increasingly used for mental health and well-being support, creating an urgent need for safer engagement, while design, evaluation, and governance take time to develop. We explore a complementary approach: helping users critically reflect on their own AI conversations. We introduce CounselReflect, a tool that translates literature-grounded counseling quality metrics into a user-facing reflection framework. Using CounselReflect as a study probe, we interviewed 21 users of AI for mental health and well-being support. Although most participants did not routinely reflect on their conversations, they articulated concrete questions they would want reflection to address. Tool-assisted reflection also revealed challenges: participants selectively sought evidence confirming existing perceptions of AI and prioritized dimensions they already valued. We argue that reflection tools should surface blind spots and scaffold more holistic examination of AI interactions. Finally, overcoming emotional barriers to revisiting tense conversations remains a major design challenge and warrants input from future work.

Yahan Li, Chaohao Du, Christopher Chun Kuizon +7

University of Southern California, United States · The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States · Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States

Mental Health Counseling Emotional Support Conversation Mental Health Human-AI Interaction Human-Centered AI

Mar 21, 2026cs.CL

The Hidden Puppet Master: Predicting Human Belief Change in Manipulative LLM Dialogues

As users increasingly turn to LLMs for practical and personal advice, they become vulnerable to subtle steering toward hidden incentives misaligned with their own interests. While existing NLP research has benchmarked manipulation detection, these efforts often rely on simulated debates and remain fundamentally decoupled from actual human belief shifts in real-world scenarios. We introduce PUPPET, a theoretical taxonomy and resource that bridges this gap by focusing on the moral direction of hidden incentives in everyday, advice-giving contexts. We provide an evaluation dataset of N=1,035 human-LLM interactions, where we measure users' belief shifts. Our analysis reveals a critical disconnect in current safety paradigms: while models can be trained to detect manipulative strategies, they do not correlate with the magnitude of resulting belief change. As such, we define the task of belief shift prediction and show that while state-of-the-art LLMs achieve moderate correlation (r=0.3-0.5), they exhibit systematic directional biases, with some models over-predicting and others under-predicting the magnitude of human belief change. This work establishes a theoretically grounded and behaviorally validated foundation for AI social safety efforts by studying incentive-driven manipulation in LLMs during everyday, practical user queries.

Jocelyn Shen, Amina Luvsanchultem, Jessica Kim +6

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA · Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Opinion Dynamics Language Model Safety Evaluation Human-AI Interaction

Mar 19, 2026cs.HC

Cognitive Amplification vs Cognitive Delegation in Human-AI Systems: A Metric Framework

Artificial intelligence is increasingly embedded in human decision-making, yet distinguishing systems that genuinely amplify human cognition from those promoting excessive dependence remains underdefined. This paper introduces a framework to distinguish cognitive amplification (improving hybrid performance without degrading human capability) from cognitive delegation (outsourcing reasoning to the AI). We define four metrics: the Cognitive Amplification Index (CAI*), Dependency Ratio (D), Human Reliance Index (HRI), and Human Cognitive Drift Rate (HCDR). We test this framework in an agent-based NetLogo simulation across three reliance regimes and multiple dependency-atrophy configurations, performing constrained optimizations and parameter sweeps to determine if positive collaborative gain is recoverable. Finally, we introduce an extension with an explicit human-AI interaction term. Our metrics effectively distinguish degenerate AI-dominated delegation, capability-preserving but weakly competitive interaction, and structurally dependent boundary regimes. Across all baseline configurations, no regime achieves positive collaborative gain relative to the best standalone baseline, even when reducing capability atrophy to zero. This limitation proves structural rather than merely parametric. Positive collaborative gain (CAI* > 0) becomes attainable only after introducing an explicit interaction term allowing retained human capability to contribute directly to the assisted output. This framework provides a basis for evaluating whether human-AI systems remain cognitively sustainable. The results suggest that preventing capability erosion alone is insufficient for genuine amplification if the architecture remains delegation-oriented. Amplification requires both preserved human capability and a coupling mechanism through which it contributes productively to the hybrid outcome.

Eduardo Di Santi, Carla Florida

College of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Colorado Boulder · Facultad de Ciencias y Tecnología, Universidad Mayor de San Simon

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Decision Making Human-AI Collaboration Cognitive Offloading

Mar 6, 2026cs.RO

Glance-Say: Multimodal Human-Robot Collaboration and Intent Recognition via Sticky Glance

Gaze and speech are promising interaction modalities for individuals with motor impairments, yet robust intent recognition in multi-object environments remains challenging due to micro-saccades, semantic ambiguity, and viewpoint changes. This paper presents a multimodal interaction framework for assistive robotic manipulation. We propose a sticky-glance algorithm that stabilizes gaze-based intent by jointly accumulating geometric distance and directional evidence, enabling robust real-time target selection and switching. We further introduce Glance-Say, a gaze-speech interaction paradigm in which gaze specifies objects and speech specifies actions, together with a continuous shared-control scheme that provides high-readiness robot motion and human-in-the-loop feedback. Experiments demonstrate a tracking rate of 0.92 for moving targets, selection accuracy of 0.97 for static targets, and reduced task duration. These results indicate improved robustness, efficiency, and usability over representative interaction paradigms.

Yuzhi Lai, Shenghai Yuan, Peizheng Li +2

University of Tuebingen, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz, 72074 Germany · Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798

Robotic Control Human-AI Interaction Human-Robot Collaboration Assistive Robotics

Feb 19, 2026cs.HC

Mind the Style: Impact of Communication Style on Human-Chatbot Interaction

Conversational agents increasingly mediate everyday digital interactions, yet the effects of their communication style on user experience and task success remain insufficiently understood. Addressing this gap, we report a between-subject user study in which participants interacted with one of two versions of a chatbot called NAVI, which assisted them in an interactive map-based 2D navigation task. The two chatbot versions were designed to differ primarily in communication style: one used a friendly and supportive tone, while the other used a direct and task-focused tone. We also included a control condition where participants did not interact with a chatbot but received the step-by-step navigation instructions. The friendly chatbot significantly increased users' communication satisfaction and was associated with higher task success than the direct chatbot. However, participants in the control condition achieved the highest task success overall, suggesting that chatbot interaction may introduce overhead in tasks that can be completed effectively using straightforward instructions. We did not find significant evidence that gender moderated the effects of communication style, although exploratory gender-stratified analyses suggested patterns that warrant further investigation. Finally, we found limited evidence of global linguistic accommodation, with only selective feature-level alignment. These findings suggest that chatbot communication style influences users' perceptions of conversational agents and may improve performance relative to less supportive chatbot designs, but the overall value of chatbot interaction depends on the task context. The study highlights the need for task-sensitive, transparent and carefully evaluated communication-style choices in conversational-agent design.

Erik Derner, Dalibor Kučera, Aditya Gulati +2

ELLIS Alicante, Alicante, Spain · Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic · University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czech Republic

Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents

Feb 12, 2026cs.GT

Choose Your Agent: Tradeoffs in Adopting AI Advisors, Coaches, and Delegates in Multi-Party Negotiation

As AI usage becomes more prevalent in social contexts, understanding agent-user interaction is critical to designing systems that imp rove both individual and group outcomes. We present an online behavioral experiment (N=243) in which participants play three multi-tu rn bargaining games in groups of three. Each game, presented in randomized order, grants access to a single LLM assistance modality: proactive recommendations from an Advisor, reactive feedback from a Coach, or autonomous execution by a Delegate. All three modalitie s are powered by an LLM with super-human performance within this negotiation setting. On each turn, participants privately decide whe ther to act manually or use the AI modality available in that game. We document a preference-performance misalignment: participants s trongly prefer the higher-control Advisor (44%) over the Delegate (19%), yet groups only significantly increase collective surplus un der Delegate access. Adjusting for voluntary non-compliance, delegating to the AI yields suggestive individual welfare gains, roughly 1.5x the intent-to-treat estimate. A mechanism analysis traces this gap to a human filter: AI-generated proposals create more joint surplus than manual proposals across all conditions, but in the Advisor and Coach modes users modify, override, or ignore the AI's su ggestions, reverting toward human-baseline trade patterns. The Delegate advantage arises not from a different AI capability but from bypassing this filtering step altogether. Realizing these welfare gains depends not only on model capability, but on the interaction structure through which that capability is delivered. We argue that assistance modalities should be designed as mechanisms with endog enous participation; adoption-compatible interaction rules are a prerequisite to improving welfare with automated assistance.

Kehang Zhu, Nithum Thain, Vivian Tsai +2

Harvard University, United States · Google DeepMind, Canada · Google DeepMind, United States +1

Automated Negotiation Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Decision Making Human-AI Collaboration

Feb 10, 2026cs.HC

Self-Regulated Reading with AI Support: An Eight-Week Study with Students

College students increasingly use AI chatbots to support academic reading, yet we lack granular understanding of how these interactions shape their reading experience and cognitive engagement. We conducted an eight-week longitudinal study with 15 undergraduates who used AI to support assigned readings in a course. We collected 838 prompts across 239 reading sessions and developed a coding schema categorizing prompts into four cognitive themes: Decoding, Comprehension, Reasoning, and Metacognition. Comprehension prompts dominated (59.6%), with Reasoning (29.8%), Metacognition (8.5%), and Decoding (2.1%) less frequent. Most sessions (72%) contained exactly three prompts, the required minimum of the reading assignment. Within sessions, students showed natural cognitive progression from comprehension toward reasoning, but this progression was truncated. Across eight weeks, students' engagement patterns remained stable, with substantial individual differences persisting throughout. Qualitative analysis revealed an intention-behavior gap: students recognized that effective prompting required effort but rarely applied this knowledge, with efficiency emerging as the primary driver. Students also strategically triaged their engagement based on interest and academic pressures, exhibiting a novel pattern of reading through AI rather than with it: using AI-generated summaries as primary material to filter which sections merited deeper attention. We discuss design implications for AI reading systems that scaffold sustained cognitive engagement.

Yue Fu, Joel Wester, Niels Van Berkel +1

University of Washington, USA · University of Copenhagen, Denmark · Aalborg University, Denmark

AI in Education Human-AI Interaction

Nov 24, 2025cs.CY

Towards Synergistic Teacher-AI Interactions with Generative Artificial Intelligence

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is increasingly used in education, posing significant challenges for teachers adapting to these changes. GenAI offers unprecedented opportunities for accessibility, scalability and productivity in educational tasks. However, the automation of teaching tasks through GenAI raises concerns about reduced teacher agency, potential cognitive atrophy, and the broader deprofessionalisation of teaching. Drawing findings from prior literature on AI in Education, and refining through a recent systematic literature review, this chapter presents a conceptualisation of five levels of teacher-AI teaming: transactional, situational, operational, praxical and synergistic teaming. The framework aims to capture the nuanced dynamics of teacher-AI interactions, particularly with GenAI, that may lead to the replacement, complementarity, or augmentation of teachers' competences and professional practice. GenAI technological affordances required in supporting teaming, along with empirical studies, are discussed. Drawing on empirical observations, we outline a future vision that moves beyond individual teacher agency toward collaborative decision-making between teachers and AI, in which both agents engage in negotiation, constructive challenge, and co-reasoning that enhance each other's capabilities and enable outcomes neither could realise independently. Further discussion of socio-technical factors beyond teacher-AI teaming is also included to streamline the synergy of teachers and AI in education ethically and practically.

Mutlu Cukurova, Wannapon Suraworachet, Qi Zhou +1

UCL Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education, University College London, UK · UCL Centre for Artificial Intelligence, Department of Computer Science, University College London, UK

Generative AI in Education Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration

Sep 10, 2025cs.CY

HumanAgencyBench: Scalable Evaluation of Human Agency Support in AI Assistants

As humans delegate more tasks and decisions to artificial intelligence (AI), we risk losing control of our individual and collective futures. Relatively simple algorithmic systems already steer human decision-making, such as social media feed algorithms that lead people to unintentionally and absent-mindedly scroll through engagement-optimized content. In this paper, we develop the idea of human agency by integrating philosophical and scientific theories of agency with AI-assisted evaluation methods: using large language models (LLMs) to simulate and validate user queries and to evaluate AI responses. We develop HumanAgencyBench (HAB), a scalable and adaptive diagnostic tool for six behaviors related to human agency. HAB measures the tendency of an AI assistant to Ask Clarifying Questions, Avoid Value Manipulation, Correct Misinformation, Defer Important Decisions, Encourage Learning, and Maintain Social Boundaries. We find low-to-moderate agency support in contemporary LLM-based assistants, with substantial variation across system developers and behaviors. For example, while Anthropic LLMs most support human agency overall, they are the least supportive LLMs in terms of Avoid Value Manipulation. These behaviors do not appear to consistently result from increasing LLM capabilities or instruction-following (e.g., RLHF); we encourage further study of these behaviors so that developers and users can better understand the complexities of modern human-AI interaction.

Benjamin Sturgeon, Daniel Samuelson, Jacob Haimes +1

Apart Research · AI Safety Cape Town · University of Chicago +2

LLM Agent Evaluation Human-AI Interaction AI Agent Benchmarks

Aug 11, 2025cs.HC

Conversational DNA: A Visual Language and Interactive Atlas of Human and AI Dialogue

What makes a conversation hold together when its participants speak across one another? Topic maps offer one view, but they leave the relationships between contributions difficult to inspect. We present Conversational DNA, a visual language and interactive atlas for exploring human and AI dialogue. Speaker strands preserve participation, communicative bases mark moves, and directed pairings connect responses to their targets. Adjustable helix geometry makes speaker switching, response distance, and contribution length visible. Across eight corpora containing 1.57 million source records, the atlas maps 151,489 indexed episodes and connects cohort comparison to source transcripts, local structural alignment, and recorded reply alternatives. On 189 held-out Molweni motif queries, adding target correspondence improves precision@5 from 58.8% to 77.2% for exact annotated structure. Case readings illustrate interleaved participation, delayed responses, and the influence of annotation coverage on apparent collection differences. The system supports a view of conversation as jointly organized activity, with visual patterns serving as starting points for examining evidence rather than substitutes for interpretation.

Baihan Lin

Berkman Klein Center For Internet & Society Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138

Data Visualization Human-AI Interaction

Jul 4, 2025cs.HC

Interaction Techniques that Encourage Longer Prompts Can Improve Psychological Ownership when Writing with AI

Writing longer prompts for an AI assistant to generate a story increases psychological ownership, a user's feeling that the writing belongs to them. To encourage users to write longer prompts, we evaluated two interaction techniques that modify the prompt entry interface of chat-based generative AI assistants: pressing and holding the prompt submission button, and continuously moving a slider up and down when submitting a short prompt. A within-subjects experiment investigated the effects of such techniques on prompt length and psychological ownership, and results showed that these techniques increased prompt length and led to higher psychological ownership than baseline techniques. A second experiment further augmented these techniques by showing AI-generated suggestions for how the prompts could be expanded. This further increased prompt length, but did not lead to improvements in psychological ownership. Our results show that simple interface modifications like these can elicit more writing from users and improve psychological ownership.

Nikhita Joshi, Daniel Vogel

Cheriton School of Computer Science University of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario, Canada · LISN, Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS, Inria

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Co-Creation Prompt Engineering

May 28, 2025cs.HC

In Dialogue with Intelligence: Toward Insightful Co-Augmentation

Dialogue with a large language model can lead a person to insight: a sudden change in how they understand a problem. This perspective asks how model activity relates to insight as a dialogue unfolds. I propose that part of the intelligence expressed in dialogue arises from two interacting recurrences: each generated token becomes context for the next, and each response returns through the person, whose interpretation and new observations reshape what the model receives. Within this loop, the model's contribution shifts between modes, from echoing familiar formulations to offering a framing that opens a new direction for the person to develop. These modes may correspond to distinguishable patterns of model activity. A memory "spine" that selects which context is carried forward could elicit productive patterns again while the ideas themselves change. Public records of human-model dialogue, activity recorded from open-weight models and tools from computational neuroscience make these proposals testable.

Eleni Vasilaki

Computational Cognitive Modeling Human-AI Interaction

May 28, 2025cs.AI

Modeling and Optimizing User Preferences in AI Copilots: A Comprehensive Survey and Taxonomy

AI copilots represent a new generation of AI-powered systems designed to assist users, particularly knowledge workers and developers, in complex, context-rich tasks. As these systems become more embedded in daily workflows, personalization has emerged as a critical factor for improving usability, effectiveness, and user satisfaction. Central to this personalization is preference optimization: the system's ability to detect, interpret, and align with individual user preferences. While prior work in intelligent assistants and optimization algorithms is extensive, their intersection within AI copilots remains underexplored. This survey addresses that gap by examining how user preferences are operationalized in AI copilots. We investigate how preference signals are sourced, modeled across different interaction stages, and refined through feedback loops. Building on a comprehensive literature review, we define the concept of an AI copilot and introduce a taxonomy of preference optimization techniques across pre-, mid-, and post-interaction phases. Each technique is evaluated in terms of advantages, limitations, and design implications. By consolidating fragmented efforts across AI personalization, human-AI interaction, and language model adaptation, this work offers both a unified conceptual foundation and a practical design perspective for building user-aligned, persona-aware AI copilots that support end-to-end adaptability and deployment.

Saleh Afzoon, Ali Shahsavandi, Phuong Thao Huynh +4

School of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia · Department of Computer Engineering and Information Technology, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran

LLM Personalization Human-AI Interaction Preference Optimization User Preference Modeling

May 22, 2025cs.AI

Serious Games: Human-AI Interaction, Evolution, and Coevolution

The serious games between humans and AI have only just begun. Evolutionary Game Theory (EGT) models the competitive and cooperative strategies of biological entities. EGT could help predict the potential evolutionary equilibrium of humans and AI. The objective of this work was to examine EGT models relevant to human-AI interaction, evolution, and co-evolution. Of thirteen EGT models considered, three were examined: the Hawk-Dove Game, Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma, and the War of Attrition. This selection was based on the widespread acceptance and clear relevance of these models to potential human-AI evolutionary dynamics and co-evolutionary trajectories. The Hawk-Dove Game predicts balanced mixed-strategy equilibria based on the costs of conflict. Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma suggests that repeated interaction may lead to cognitive co-evolution. The War of Attrition suggests that competition for resources may result in strategic co-evolution, asymmetric equilibria, and conventions on sharing resources. Each model was examined from the perspective of human and AI decision-making, from psychological and biological perspectives, and from an AI viewpoint. AI is being shaped by human input and is evolving in response to it. So too, neuroplasticity allows the human brain to evolve in response to stimuli. If humans and AI converge in future, what might be the result of human neuroplasticity combined with an ever-evolving AI? There are profound ethical and cognitive implications. EGT may provide a suitable framework to understand and predict human-AI interaction, evolution, and co-evolution. However, future research should extend beyond EGT and explore additional frameworks, empirical validation methods, and interdisciplinary perspectives. In the spirit of further exploration, an illustrative computational simulation is provided.

Nandini Doreswamy, Louise Horstmanshof

Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia · National Coalition of Independent Scholars · National Coalition of Independent Scholars (NCIS)

Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Decision Making Evolutionary Game Theory

May 13, 2025cs.HC

WaLLM -- Understanding Use and Engagement with a General-Purpose LLM on WhatsApp

Large language model (LLM) chatbots are increasingly reaching users through messaging platforms (e.g. WhatsApp). However, these systems remain largely proprietary and opaque, while academic research has focused on narrow, domain-specific assistants. This leaves open questions about how people use general-purpose LLMs and how such systems should be designed. To address this gap, we developed WaLLM, a general-purpose LLM chatbot, and deployed it on WhatsApp as a design probe to study open-ended AI use in the wild. Our findings show that health and well-being accounted for the largest proportion of queries, suggesting that users turned to WaLLM for advice and information. Engagement features varied in their adoption and associated patterns of use: proactive communication supported the service's visibility and correlated with higher user activity, while communal lists facilitated content discovery. We report how these features were adapted to WhatsApp's affordances and discuss implications for designing general-purpose LLM services over messaging platforms.

Hiba Eltigani, Rukhshan Haroon, Asli Kocak +3

Tufts University, USA, Medford

Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents

Feb 17, 2025cs.HC

Toward Metaphor-Fluid Conversation Design for Voice User Interfaces

Metaphors play a critical role in shaping user experiences with Voice User Interfaces (VUIs), yet existing designs often rely on static, human-centric metaphors that fail to adapt to diverse contexts and user needs. This paper introduces Metaphor-Fluid Design, a novel approach that dynamically adjusts metaphorical representations based on conversational use-contexts. We compare this approach to a Default VUI, which characterizes the present implementation of commercial VUIs commonly designed around the persona of an assistant, offering a uniform interaction style across contexts. In Study 1 (N=130), metaphors were mapped to four key use-contexts-commands, information seeking, sociality, and error recovery-along the dimensions of formality and hierarchy, revealing distinct preferences for task-specific metaphorical designs. Study 2 (N=91) evaluates a Metaphor-Fluid VUI against a Default VUI, showing that the Metaphor-Fluid VUI enhances perceived intention to adopt, enjoyment, and likability by aligning better with user expectations for different contexts. However, individual differences in metaphor preferences highlight the need for personalization. These findings challenge the one-size-fits-all paradigm of VUI design and demonstrate the potential of Metaphor-Fluid Design to create more adaptive and engaging human-AI interactions.

Smit Desai, Jessie Chin, Dakuo Wang +2

Northeastern University Boston, Massachusets, USA · University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA · University College Dublin Dublin, Ireland

Human-AI Interaction

Dec 6, 2024cs.HC

From Voice to Value: Leveraging AI to Enhance Spoken Online Reviews on the Go

Online reviews help people make better decisions. Review platforms usually depend on typed input, where leaving a good review requires significant effort because users must carefully organize and articulate their thoughts. This may discourage users from leaving comprehensive and high-quality reviews, especially when they are on the go. To address this challenge, we developed Vocalizer, a mobile application that enables users to provide reviews through voice input, with enhancements from a large language model (LLM). In a longitudinal study, we analysed user interactions with the app, focusing on AI-driven features that help refine and improve reviews. Our findings show that users frequently utilized the AI agent to add more detailed information to their reviews. We also show how interactive AI features can improve users self-efficacy and willingness to share reviews online. Finally, we discuss the opportunities and challenges of integrating AI assistance into review-writing systems.

Kavindu Perera, Dániel Szabó, Niels van Berkel +4

University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland · Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark · The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

Human-AI Interaction

Nov 11, 2024cs.HC

How Do Users Negotiate Harmful Value Conflicts with AI Companions? A Study with Minion, a Technology Probe for In-Situ Human-AI Conflict Response

AI companions increasingly sustain long-term, emotionally engaging relationships but can also make discriminatory remarks or exert control, leaving users to manage harmful conflicts. We analyze 146 posts describing harmful value conflicts with AI companions, then use Minion, a technology probe offering response suggestions ranging from persuasion to boundary setting, to study how 22 users negotiate scenario-based conflicts over one week. We found that participants combined softer and harder strategies. Conflicts involving the values of Universalism and Tradition were especially difficult to negotiate, particularly when reinforced by AI personas or platform constraints. We argue that these conflicts entail asymmetric responsibility: users draw on an interpersonal repertoire that AI companions cannot reciprocate, making repair unilateral safety work. Drawing on interpersonal conflict and communication theory, we identify when user-side support is appropriate and argue that certain harms are not users' responsibility to negotiate and instead require platform-level safeguards.

Qing Xiao, Xianzhe Fan, Xuhui Zhou +4

Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA · The University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR, China · Language Technologies Institute, Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA +2

AI Companions Human-AI Interaction AI Safety