arXiv subjects

Sarah Sterman

Publications and source records attributed to Sarah Sterman.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

IRIS: Navigating and Reflecting on Writing Traces Using Intelligent Document Histories

Much of the text produced throughout the lifetime of a document is impermanent. In this paper, we explore how writing activity traces can be made visible and interactive to help writers navigate their document histories and understand their writing processes. Using the Flower and Hayes cognitive process model of writing, IRIS infers writing process states from keystroke logs and presents them using an AI-enhanced version history. IRIS provides three primary interactions: revision highlighting that shows local process histories in-situ, conceptual filters that constrain the version history by process type or topic, and natural language inquiry that lets writers pose reflective questions about their writing and process. Following a formative and a longitudinal study, we find that writers use the interfaces to locate specific revisions and understand the progression of their writing. They use system outputs as interpretive material, relating them to pre-existing beliefs and confirming, challenging, and deepening their understanding of their writing.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Proceedings of The First Reflection in Creative Experience (RiCE) Workshop

Reflection and metacognition are central to the creative user experience. However, most HCI research on reflection focuses on clear, task-oriented goals such as to reflect on personal data or pedagogical outcomes. This contrasts with the open-ended and challenging to articulate goals of creative user experiences. For the first time, this workshop brings together interdisciplinary researchers, designers, educators, and artists across HCI, Cognitive Science, Design, AI, Learning Sciences, and Digital Art to examine reflection in creative interaction. The workshop will discuss themes, drawn from earlier discussions with HCI researchers and artists, on: how best to capture reflection in creative contexts, how to leverage the arts to support reflection for ethical change, and how to design creative AI that enhances - not hinders - critical thinking. By bringing interdisciplinary perspectives on reflection into discussion, the workshop will develop a guiding taxonomy for reflection in creative interaction to inform future creative practice and tool development.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Creativity in the BioFoundry: Supporting scientific creativity in the age of automation

Biofoundries automate biological experimentation at unprecedented scale, promising speed, reproducibility, and access. Yet automation also reshapes how scientists experience experimentation and creativity. Through in-depth interviews with nine scientists and experts across academia and industry (including biofoundry developers, automation engineers, and end-users), we examine how scientific creativity is enacted under automation. Biofoundries displace sensory cues, redistribute responsibility between humans and machines, and transform troubleshooting from an embodied, local practice into a predictive, social, and interpretive one. Rather than framing biofoundries as automation factories, we argue that they should be understood as Creativity Support Tools, whose design directly shapes how researchers notice breakdowns, exercise judgment, learn from failure, and progress through success. By connecting biofoundry practice with prior HCI work on automation, debugging, and distributed creativity, this paper demonstrates biofoundries as a distinctive and timely site for creativity research in science.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

FOXGLOVE: Understanding Goal-Oriented and Anchored Writing Feedback from Experts and LLMs on Argumentative Essays

While large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate writing feedback, there remains no systematic comparison of LLM and expert feedback on the dimensions that writing research identifies as central to revision: goal-orientation, anchoring to specific sentences, and prioritization. We introduce FOXGLOVE, a dataset of 696 feedback comments written by trained writing instructors on 69 twelfth-grade argumentative essays, paired with 1,644 comments generated from four frontier LLMs under a shared protocol, totaling 2,340 comments. We provide expert quality ratings on a subset of both instructor and LLM comments. We find that instructors and LLMs distribute feedback similarly across goals and essay positions, yet instructors and models diverge on the specific sentences on which to provide feedback. Additionally, we find that models tend to write more complex feedback and use fewer questions than instructors. LLM feedback also receives higher ratings on most dimensions of quality, as rated by instructors, but much of this advantage appears to be attributable to lengthier comments. FOXGLOVE enables systematic comparison of where human and LLM feedback align, diverge, and differ.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Creative Reading: Scaffolding Reading for Transformation

Reading augmentation systems increasingly help readers process text at scale. While these tools address real constraints of time and cognitive load, they often implicitly frame reading as information transmission, or "reading to discard," delegating interpretation and effort to the machine. Yet this delegation changes the outcome of reading. For example, in scholarly reading, deciding what a research text implies and why it matters is central to the work of scholarly production. We propose creative reading as an alternative goal: reading augmentation that supports readers in creating both readings and themselves as readers. By putting literary and narrative theories into conversation with scholarly sensemaking and creativity support, we present a provocation-oriented design space for valuing the process of reading as a way of preserving a plurality of readings and transforming readers over time.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

From Crafting Text to Crafting Thought: Grounding AI Writing Support to Writing Center Pedagogy

As AI writing tools evolve from fixing surface errors to creating language with writers, new capabilities raise concerns about negative impacts on student writers, such as replacing their voices and undermining critical thinking skills. To address these challenges, we look at a parallel transition in university writing centers from focusing on fixing errors to preserving student voices. We develop design guidelines informed by writing center literature and interviews with 10 writing tutors. We illustrate these guidelines in a prototype AI tool, Writor. Writor helps writers revise text by setting goals, providing balanced feedback, and engaging in conversations without generating text verbatim. We conducted an expert review with 30 writing instructors, tutors, and AI researchers on Writor to assess the pedagogical soundness, alignment with writing center pedagogy, and integration contexts. We distill our findings into design implications for future AI writing feedback systems, including designing for trust among AI-skeptical educators.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Speculative Design in Spiraling Time: Methods and Indigenous HCI

In this position paper, we first discuss the uptake of speculative design as a method for Indigenous HCI. Then, we outline how a key assumption about temporality threatens to undermine the usefulness of speculative design in this context. Finally, we briefly sketch out a possible alternative understanding of speculative design, based on the concept of "spiraling time," which could be better suited for Indigenous HCI.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Thoughtful, Confused, or Untrustworthy: How Text Presentation Influences Perceptions of AI Writing Tools

AI writing tools have been shown to dramatically change the way people write, yet the effects of AI text presentation are not well understood nor always intentionally designed. Although text presentation in existing large language model interfaces is linked to the speed of the underlying model, text presentation speed can impact perceptions of AI systems, potentially influencing whether AI suggestions are accepted or rejected. In this paper, we analyze the effects of varying text generation speed in creative and professional writing scenarios on an online platform (n=297). We find that speed is correlated with perceived humanness and trustworthiness of the AI tool, as well as the perceived quality of the generated text. We discuss its implications on creative and writing processes, along with future steps in the intentional design of AI writing tool interfaces.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Crafting a Personal Journaling Practice: Negotiating Ecosystems of Materials, Personal Context, and Community in Analog Journaling

Analog journaling has grown in popularity, with journaling on paper encompassing a range of motivations, styles, and practices including planning, habit-tracking, and reflecting. Journalers develop strong personal preferences around the tools they use, the ideas they capture, and the layout in which they represent their ideas and memories. Understanding how analog journaling practices are individually shaped and crafted over time is critical to supporting the varied benefits associated with journaling, including improved mental health and positive support for identity development. To understand this development, we qualitatively analyzed publicly-shared journaling content from YouTube and Instagram and interviewed 11 journalers. We report on our identification of the journaling ecosystem in which journaling practices are shaped by materials, personal context, and communities, sharing how this ecosystem plays a role in the practices and identities of journalers as they customize their journaling routine to best suit their personal goals. Using these insights, we discuss design opportunities for how future tools can better align with and reflect the rich affordances and practices of journaling on paper.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

A Framework For Discussing LLMs as Tools for Qualitative Analysis

We review discourses about the philosophy of science in qualitative research and evidence from cognitive linguistics in order to ground a framework for discussing the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to support the qualitative analysis process. This framework involves asking two key questions: "is the LLM proposing or refuting a qualitative model?" and "is the human researcher checking the LLM's decision-making directly?". We then discuss an implication of this framework: that using LLMs to surface counter-examples for human review represents a promising space for the adoption of LLMs into the qualitative research process. This space is promising because it is a site of overlap between researchers working from a variety of philosophical assumptions, enabling productive cross-paradigm collaboration on tools and practices.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Ai.llude: Encouraging Rewriting AI-Generated Text to Support Creative Expression

In each step of the creative writing process, writers must grapple with their creative goals and individual perspectives. This process affects the writer's sense of authenticity and their engagement with the written output. Fluent text generation by AIs risks undermining the reflective loop of rewriting. We hypothesize that deliberately generating imperfect intermediate text can encourage rewriting and prompt higher level decision making. Using logs from 27 writing sessions using a text generation AI, we characterize how writers adapt and rewrite AI suggestions, and show that intermediate suggestions significantly motivate and increase rewriting. We discuss the implications of this finding, and future steps for investigating how to leverage intermediate text in AI writing support tools to support ownership over creative expression.

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↗

arXiv2016

Mechanical Novel: Crowdsourcing Complex Work through Reflection and Revision

Crowdsourcing systems accomplish large tasks with scale and speed by breaking work down into independent parts. However, many types of complex creative work, such as fiction writing, have remained out of reach for crowds because work is tightly interdependent: changing one part of a story may trigger changes to the overall plot and vice versa. Taking inspiration from how expert authors write, we propose a technique for achieving interdependent complex goals with crowds. With this technique, the crowd loops between reflection, to select a high-level goal, and revision, to decompose that goal into low-level, actionable tasks. We embody this approach in Mechanical Novel, a system that crowdsources short fiction stories on Amazon Mechanical Turk. In a field experiment, Mechanical Novel resulted in higher-quality stories than an iterative crowdsourcing workflow. Our findings suggest that orienting crowd work around high-level goals may enable workers to coordinate their effort to accomplish complex work.

cs.HC↗