SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

David De Cremer

Publications and source records attributed to David De Cremer.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Personalized AI Scaffolds Synergistic Multi-Turn Collaboration in Creative Work

As AI becomes more deeply embedded in knowledge work, building assistants that support human creativity and expertise becomes more important. Yet achieving synergy in human-AI collaboration is not easy. Providing AI with detailed information about a user's demographics, psychological attributes, divergent thinking, and domain expertise may improve performance by scaffolding more effective multi-turn interactions. We implemented a personalized LLM-based assistant, informed by users' psychometric profiles and an AI-guided interview about their work style, to help users complete a marketing task for a fictional startup. We randomized 331 participants to work with AI that was either generic (n = 116), partially personalized (n = 114), or fully personalized (n=101). Participants working with personalized AI produce marketing campaigns of significantly higher quality and creativity, beyond what AI alone could have produced. Compared to generic AI, personalized AI leads to higher self-reported levels of assistance and feedback, while also increasing participant trust and confidence. Causal mediation analysis shows that personalization improves performance indirectly by enhancing collective memory, attention, and reasoning in the human-AI interaction. These findings provide a theory-driven framework in which personalization functions as external scaffolding that builds common ground and shared partner models, reducing uncertainty and enhancing joint cognition. This informs the design of future AI assistants that maximize synergy and support human creative potential while limiting negative homogenization.

cs.HC

The AI Penalty: People Reduce Compensation for Workers Who Use AI

We investigate whether and why people might adjust compensation for workers who use AI tools. Across 13 studies (N = 4,956), participants consistently lowered compensation for workers who used AI compared to those who did not. This "AI penalty" is robust across different work scenarios and work tasks, worker statuses, forms and timing of compensation, methods of eliciting compensation, and perceptions of output quality. Moreover, the effect emerges in both hypothetical compensation scenarios as well as real monetary compensation of gig workers. We find that perceived effort and perceived agency -- the degree to which an individual serves as the originating source of the core intellectual or creative contribution in a task -- explain decisions to reduce compensation for AI-users. However, the penalty is not inevitable. Workers who strategically retain creative agency over core tasks recover most of the AI penalty, and employment contracts that make compensation reductions impermissible provide structural means of reducing the AI penalty.

econ.GN