arXiv subjects

Eugenia H. Rho

Publications and source records attributed to Eugenia H. Rho.

11 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

ArguScale: Evidence-Grounded Human-AI Sensemaking Across Concurrent Live Conversations

Monitoring concurrent classroom collaborative reasoning discussions is challenging because instructors have to track collaboration-relevant behaviors across multiple ongoing conversations at once. Existing Human-AI conversational sensemaking systems can scale monitoring upward through summaries and visual abstractions, but these representations may distance users from underlying conversational evidence, e.g., relevant audio and transcript segments, needed to forage downward. Through our formative study, we developed ArguScale, an evidence-grounded Human-AI sensemaking system that organizes interactional signals into temporally aligned representations linked to transcript and audio evidence. A temporal signal-density view provides temporal context and supports rapid cross-group comparison, while selective evidence access allows instructors to inspect audio and transcript. We evaluated ArguScale in a mixed-design study with 20 participants. Compared to other conditions, ArguScale improved participants' ability to efficiently and accurately identify collaboration-relevant cues. We further identify strategies participants used to forage for and make sense of conversational evidence under live time constraints.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

"Are we writing an advice column for Spock here?" Understanding Stereotypes in AI Advice for Autistic Users

Autistic individuals sometimes disclose autism when asking LLMs for social advice, hoping for more personalized responses. However, they also recognize that these systems may reproduce stereotypes, raising uncertainty about the risks and benefits of disclosure. We conducted a mixed-methods study combining a large-scale LLM audit experiment with interviews involving 11 autistic participants. We developed a six-step pipeline operationalizing 12 documented autism stereotypes into decision-making scenarios framed as users requesting advice (e.g., "Should I do A or B?"). We generated 345,000 responses from six LLMs and measured how advice shifted when prompts disclosed autism versus when they did not. When autism was disclosed, LLMs disproportionately recommended avoiding stereotypically stressful situations, including social events, confrontations, new experiences, and romantic relationships. While some participants viewed this as affirming, others criticized it as infantilizing or undermining opportunities for growth. Our study illuminates how the intermingling of affirmation and stereotyping complicates the personalization of LLMs.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Human-Human-AI Triadic Programming: Uncovering the Role of AI Agent and the Value of Human Partner in Collaborative Learning

As AI assistance becomes embedded in programming practice, researchers have increasingly examined how these systems help learners generate code and work more efficiently. However, these studies often position AI as a replacement for human collaboration and overlook the social and learning-oriented aspects that emerge in collaborative programming. Our work introduces human-human-AI (HHAI) triadic programming, where an AI agent serves as an additional collaborator rather than a substitute for a human partner. Through a within-subjects study with 20 participants, we show that triadic collaboration enhances collaborative learning and social presence compared to the dyadic human-AI (HAI) baseline. In the triadic HHAI conditions, participants relied significantly less on AI-generated code in their work. This effect was strongest in the HHAI-shared condition, where participants had an increased sense of responsibility to understand AI suggestions before applying them. These findings demonstrate how triadic settings activate socially shared regulation of learning by making AI use visible and accountable to a human peer, suggesting that AI systems that augment rather than automate peer collaboration can better preserve the learning processes that collaborative programming relies on.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

How Managers Perceive AI-Assisted Conversational Training for Workplace Communication

Effective workplace communication is essential for managerial success, yet many managers lack access to tailored and sustained training. Although AI-assisted communication systems may offer scalable training solutions, little is known about how managers envision the role of AI in helping them improve their communication skills. To investigate this, we designed a conversational role-play system, CommCoach, as a functional probe to understand how managers anticipate using AI to practice their communication skills. Through semi-structured interviews, participants emphasized the value of adaptive, low-risk simulations for practicing difficult workplace conversations. They also highlighted opportunities, including human-AI teaming, transparent and context-aware feedback, and greater control over AI-generated personas. AI-assisted communication training should balance personalization, structured learning objectives, and adaptability to different user styles and contexts. However, achieving this requires carefully navigating tensions between adaptive and consistent AI feedback, realism and potential bias, and the open-ended nature of AI conversations versus structured workplace discourse.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Conversate: Supporting Reflective Learning in Interview Practice Through Interactive Simulation and Dialogic Feedback

Job interviews play a critical role in shaping one's career, yet practicing interview skills can be challenging, especially without access to human coaches or peers for feedback. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) present an opportunity to enhance the interview practice experience. Yet, little research has explored the effectiveness and user perceptions of such systems or the benefits and challenges of using LLMs for interview practice. Furthermore, while prior work and recent commercial tools have demonstrated the potential of AI to assist with interview practice, they often deliver one-way feedback, where users only receive information about their performance. By contrast, dialogic feedback, a concept developed in learning sciences, is a two-way interaction feedback process that allows users to further engage with and learn from the provided feedback through interactive dialogue. This paper introduces Conversate, a web-based application that supports reflective learning in job interview practice by leveraging large language models (LLMs) for interactive interview simulations and dialogic feedback. To start the interview session, the user provides the title of a job position (e.g., entry-level software engineer) in the system. Then, our system will initialize the LLM agent to start the interview simulation by asking the user an opening interview question and following up with questions carefully adapted to subsequent user responses. After the interview session, our back-end LLM framework will then analyze the user's responses and highlight areas for improvement. Users can then annotate the transcript by selecting specific sections and writing self-reflections. Finally, the user can interact with the system for dialogic feedback, conversing with the LLM agent to learn from and iteratively refine their answers based on the agent's guidance.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Exploring Large Language Models Through a Neurodivergent Lens: Use, Challenges, Community-Driven Workarounds, and Concerns

Despite the increasing use of large language models (LLMs) in everyday life among neurodivergent individuals, our knowledge of how they engage with, and perceive LLMs remains limited. In this study, we investigate how neurodivergent individuals interact with LLMs by qualitatively analyzing topically related discussions from 61 neurodivergent communities on Reddit. Our findings reveal 20 specific LLM use cases across five core thematic areas of use among neurodivergent users: emotional well-being, mental health support, interpersonal communication, learning, and professional development and productivity. We also identified key challenges, including overly neurotypical LLM responses and the limitations of text-based interactions. In response to such challenges, some users actively seek advice by sharing input prompts and corresponding LLM responses. Others develop workarounds by experimenting and modifying prompts to be more neurodivergent-friendly. Despite these efforts, users have significant concerns around LLM use, including potential overreliance and fear of replacing human connections. Our analysis highlights the need to make LLMs more inclusive for neurodivergent users and implications around how LLM technologies can reinforce unintended consequences and behaviors.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

A Design Space for Intelligent and Interactive Writing Assistants

In our era of rapid technological advancement, the research landscape for writing assistants has become increasingly fragmented across various research communities. We seek to address this challenge by proposing a design space as a structured way to examine and explore the multidimensional space of intelligent and interactive writing assistants. Through a large community collaboration, we explore five aspects of writing assistants: task, user, technology, interaction, and ecosystem. Within each aspect, we define dimensions (i.e., fundamental components of an aspect) and codes (i.e., potential options for each dimension) by systematically reviewing 115 papers. Our design space aims to offer researchers and designers a practical tool to navigate, comprehend, and compare the various possibilities of writing assistants, and aid in the envisioning and design of new writing assistants.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Linguistically Differentiating Acts and Recalls of Racial Microaggressions on Social Media

In this work, we examine the linguistic signature of online racial microaggressions (acts) and how it differs from that of personal narratives recalling experiences of such aggressions (recalls) by Black social media users. We manually curate and annotate a corpus of acts and recalls from in-the-wild social media discussions, and verify labels with Black workshop participants. We leverage Natural Language Processing (NLP) and qualitative analysis on this data to classify (RQ1), interpret (RQ2), and characterize (RQ3) the language underlying acts and recalls of racial microaggressions in the context of racism in the U.S. Our findings show that neural language models (LMs) can classify acts and recalls with high accuracy (RQ1) with contextual words revealing themes that associate Blacks with objects that reify negative stereotypes (RQ2). Furthermore, overlapping linguistic signatures between acts and recalls serve functionally different purposes (RQ3), providing broader implications to the current challenges in content moderation systems on social media.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Leveraging Prompt-Based Large Language Models: Predicting Pandemic Health Decisions and Outcomes Through Social Media Language

We introduce a multi-step reasoning framework using prompt-based LLMs to examine the relationship between social media language patterns and trends in national health outcomes. Grounded in fuzzy-trace theory, which emphasizes the importance of gists of causal coherence in effective health communication, we introduce Role-Based Incremental Coaching (RBIC), a prompt-based LLM framework, to identify gists at-scale. Using RBIC, we systematically extract gists from subreddit discussions opposing COVID-19 health measures (Study 1). We then track how these gists evolve across key events (Study 2) and assess their influence on online engagement (Study 3). Finally, we investigate how the volume of gists is associated with national health trends like vaccine uptake and hospitalizations (Study 4). Our work is the first to empirically link social media linguistic patterns to real-world public health trends, highlighting the potential of prompt-based LLMs in identifying critical online discussion patterns that can form the basis of public health communication strategies.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

ToxVis: Enabling Interpretability of Implicit vs. Explicit Toxicity Detection Models with Interactive Visualization

The rise of hate speech on online platforms has led to an urgent need for effective content moderation. However, the subjective and multi-faceted nature of hateful online content, including implicit hate speech, poses significant challenges to human moderators and content moderation systems. To address this issue, we developed ToxVis, a visually interactive and explainable tool for classifying hate speech into three categories: implicit, explicit, and non-hateful. We fine-tuned two transformer-based models using RoBERTa, XLNET, and GPT-3 and used deep learning interpretation techniques to provide explanations for the classification results. ToxVis enables users to input potentially hateful text and receive a classification result along with a visual explanation of which words contributed most to the decision. By making the classification process explainable, ToxVis provides a valuable tool for understanding the nuances of hateful content and supporting more effective content moderation. Our research contributes to the growing body of work aimed at mitigating the harms caused by online hate speech and demonstrates the potential for combining state-of-the-art natural language processing models with interpretable deep learning techniques to address this critical issue. Finally, ToxVis can serve as a resource for content moderators, social media platforms, and researchers working to combat the spread of hate speech online.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

Same Words, Different Meanings: Semantic Polarization in Broadcast Media Language Forecasts Polarization on Social Media Discourse

With the growth of online news over the past decade, empirical studies on political discourse and news consumption have focused on the phenomenon of filter bubbles and echo chambers. Yet recently, scholars have revealed limited evidence around the impact of such phenomenon, leading some to argue that partisan segregation across news audiences cannot be fully explained by online news consumption alone and that the role of traditional legacy media may be as salient in polarizing public discourse around current events. In this work, we expand the scope of analysis to include both online and more traditional media by investigating the relationship between broadcast news media language and social media discourse. By analyzing a decade's worth of closed captions (2 million speaker turns) from CNN and Fox News along with topically corresponding discourse from Twitter, we provide a novel framework for measuring semantic polarization between America's two major broadcast networks to demonstrate how semantic polarization between these outlets has evolved (Study 1), peaked (Study 2) and influenced partisan discussions on Twitter (Study 3) across the last decade. Our results demonstrate a sharp increase in polarization in how topically important keywords are discussed between the two channels, especially after 2016, with overall highest peaks occurring in 2020. The two stations discuss identical topics in drastically distinct contexts in 2020, to the extent that there is barely any linguistic overlap in how identical keywords are contextually discussed. Further, we demonstrate at scale, how such partisan division in broadcast media language significantly shapes semantic polarity trends on Twitter (and vice-versa), empirically linking for the first time, how online discussions are influenced by televised media.

cs.CL↗