skip to main content
10.1145/3491102.3517731acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Will AI Console Me when I Lose my Pet? Understanding Perceptions of AI-Mediated Email Writing

Authors Info & Claims
Published:29 April 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Large language models are increasingly mediating, modifying, and even generating messages for users, but the receivers of these messages may not be aware of the involvement of AI. To examine this emerging direction of AI-Mediated Communication (AI-MC), we investigate people’s perceptions of AI written messages. We analyze how such perceptions change in accordance with the interpersonal emphasis of a given message. We conducted both large-scale surveys and in-depth interviews to investigate how a diverse set of factors influence people’s perceived trust in AI-mediated writing of emails. We found that people’s trust in email writers decreased when they were told that AI was involved in the writing process. Surprisingly trust increased when AI was used for writing more interpersonal emails (as opposed to more transactional ones). Our study provides insights regarding how people perceive AI-MC and has practical design implications on building AI-based products to aid human interlocutors in communication1.

References

  1. Ritu Agarwal and Jayesh Prasad. 1999. Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?Decision sciences 30, 2 (1999), 361–391.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Mary D Salter Ainsworth, Mary C Blehar, Everett Waters, and Sally N Wall. 2015. Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Psychology Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Nancy K Baym. 1995. The emergence of community in computer-mediated communication.(1995).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Joyce Berg, John Dickhaut, and Kevin McCabe. 1995. Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and economic behavior 10, 1 (1995), 122–142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. John Bowlby. 1969. Attachment and Loss: Attachment; John Bowlby. Basic books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Pablo Briñol, Richard E Petty, and S Christian Wheeler. 2006. Discrepancies between explicit and implicit self-concepts: Consequences for information processing.Journal of personality and social psychology 91, 1(2006), 154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Tom B Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.14165(2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Daniel Buschek, Martin Zürn, and Malin Eiband. 2021. The Impact of Multiple Parallel Phrase Suggestions on Email Input and Composition Behaviour of Native and Non-Native English Writers. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 732, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445372Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Alex Calderwood, Vivian Qiu, Katy Ilonka Gero, and Lydia B Chilton. 2020. How Novelists Use Generative Language Models: An Exploratory User Study.. In HAI-GEN+ user2agent@ IUI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Karen S Cook, Toshio Yamagishi, Coye Cheshire, Robin Cooper, Masafumi Matsuda, and Rie Mashima. 2005. Trust building via risk taking: A cross-societal experiment. Social psychology quarterly 68, 2 (2005), 121–142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Eric Corbett and Christopher Le Dantec. 2021. Designing Civic Technology with Trust. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 173, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445341Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Nils Dahlbäck, Arne Jönsson, and Lars Ahrenberg. 1993. Wizard of Oz studies: why and how. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Intelligent user interfaces. 193–200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. David C DeAndrea. 2014. Advancing warranting theory. Communication Theory 24, 2 (2014), 186–204.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. John December. 1996. Units of analysis for Internet communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 1, 4 (1996), JCMC143.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jens Edlund, Joakim Gustafson, Mattias Heldner, and Anna Hjalmarsson. 2008. Towards human-like spoken dialogue systems. Speech communication 50, 8-9 (2008), 630–645.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Amanda J Ferguson and Randall S Peterson. 2015. Sinking slowly: Diversity in propensity to trust predicts downward trust spirals in small groups.Journal of Applied Psychology 100, 4 (2015), 1012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeffrey T Hancock, Mor Naaman, and Karen Levy. 2020. AI-Mediated Communication: Definition, Research Agenda, and Ethical Considerations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 25, 1 (2020), 89–100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Jeffrey T. Hancock, Jennifer Thom-Santelli, and Thompson Ritchie. 2004. Deception and Design: The Impact of Communication Technology on Lying Behavior. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 129–134. https://doi.org/10.1145/985692.985709Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Jeffrey T. Hancock, Catalina Toma, and Nicole Ellison. 2007. The Truth about Lying in Online Dating Profiles. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 449–452. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240697Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Russell Hardin. 2002. Trust and trustworthiness. Russell Sage Foundation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Anthony Hartley and Donia Scott. 2001. Evaluating text quality: judging output texts without a clear source. In Proceedings of the ACL 2001 Eighth European Workshop on Natural Language Generation (EWNLG).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Susan C Herring. 1996. Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives. Vol. 39. John Benjamins Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Matthew Hines. 2019. I smell a bot: California’s SB 1001, free speech, and the future of bot regulation. Hous. L. Rev. 57(2019), 405.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Jess Hohenstein, Dominic DiFranzo, Rene F Kizilcec, Zhila Aghajari, Hannah Mieczkowski, Karen Levy, Mor Naaman, Jeff Hancock, and Malte Jung. 2021. Artificial intelligence in communication impacts language and social relationships. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.05756(2021).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Jess Hohenstein and Malte Jung. 2018. AI-Supported Messaging: An Investigation of Human-Human Text Conversation with AI Support(CHI EA ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188487Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Jess Hohenstein and Malte Jung. 2020. AI as a moral crumple zone: The effects of AI-mediated communication on attribution and trust. Computers in Human Behavior 106 (2020), 106190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Alon Jacovi, Ana Marasovic, Tim Miller, and Yoav Goldberg. 2020. Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AI. CoRR abs/2010.07487(2020). arXiv:2010.07487https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.07487Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Maurice Jakesch, Megan French, Xiao Ma, Jeffrey T Hancock, and Mor Naaman. 2019. AI-mediated communication: How the perception that profile text was written by AI affects trustworthiness. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Sara Kiesler, Jane Siegel, and Timothy W McGuire. 1984. Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication.American psychologist 39, 10 (1984), 1123.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Toko Kiyonari, Toshio Yamagishi, Karen S Cook, and Coye Cheshire. 2006. Does trust beget trustworthiness? Trust and trustworthiness in two games and two cultures: A research note. Social psychology quarterly 69, 3 (2006), 270–283.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Bran Knowles, Mark Rouncefield, Mike Harding, Nigel Davies, Lynne Blair, James Hannon, John Walden, and Ding Wang. 2015. Models and Patterns of Trust. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (CSCW ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 328–338. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675154Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Cliff A.C. Lampe, Nicole Ellison, and Charles Steinfield. 2007. A Familiar Face(Book): Profile Elements as Signals in an Online Social Network. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 435–444. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240695Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Laura Larrimore, Li Jiang, Jeff Larrimore, David Markowitz, and Scott Gorski. 2011. Peer to peer lending: The relationship between language features, trustworthiness, and persuasion success. Journal of Applied Communication Research 39, 1 (2011), 19–37.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Min Kyung Lee and Katherine Rich. 2021. Who Is Included in Human Perceptions of AI?: Trust and Perceived Fairness around Healthcare AI and Cultural Mistrust. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 138, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445570Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Gale M Lucas, Jonathan Gratch, Aisha King, and Louis-Philippe Morency. 2014. It’s only a computer: Virtual humans increase willingness to disclose. Computers in Human Behavior 37 (2014), 94–100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Stefanie M. Faas, Johannes Kraus, Alexander Schoenhals, and Martin Baumann. 2021. Calibrating Pedestrians’ Trust in Automated Vehicles: Does an Intent Display in an External HMI Support Trust Calibration and Safe Crossing Behavior?. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 157, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445738Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Xiao Ma, Jeffery T. Hancock, Kenneth Lim Mingjie, and Mor Naaman. 2017. Self-Disclosure and Perceived Trustworthiness of Airbnb Host Profiles(CSCW ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2397–2409. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998269Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. François Mairesse and Marilyn Walker. 2006. Automatic recognition of personality in conversation. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the NAACL, Companion Volume: Short Papers. 85–88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Franc Mairesse, Marilyn Walker, 2006. Words mark the nerds: Computational models of personality recognition through language. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Vol. 28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. François Mairesse, Marilyn A Walker, Matthias R Mehl, and Roger K Moore. 2007. Using linguistic cues for the automatic recognition of personality in conversation and text. Journal of artificial intelligence research 30 (2007), 457–500.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Roger C Mayer, James H Davis, and F David Schoorman. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review 20, 3 (1995), 709–734.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. D Harrison McKnight, Vivek Choudhury, and Charles Kacmar. 2002. Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information systems research 13, 3 (2002), 334–359.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Gary S Nickell and John N Pinto. 1986. The computer attitude scale. Computers in human behavior 2, 4 (1986), 301–306.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. James W Pennebaker, Matthias R Mehl, and Kate G Niederhoffer. 2003. Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual review of psychology 54, 1 (2003), 547–577.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. 2020. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of Machine Learning Research 21, 140 (2020), 1–67.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Ronald E Robertson, Alexandra Olteanu, Fernando Diaz, Milad Shokouhi, and Peter Bailey. 2021. “I Can’t Reply with That”: Characterizing Problematic Email Reply Suggestions. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 724, 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445557Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Ronald E Robertson, Alexandra Olteanu, Fernando Diaz, Milad Shokouhi, and Peter Bailey. 2021. “I Can’t Reply with That”: Characterizing Problematic Email Reply Suggestions. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Julian B Rotter. 1971. Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust.American psychologist 26, 5 (1971), 443.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Quentin Roy, Sébastien Berlioux, Géry Casiez, and Daniel Vogel. 2021. Typing Efficiency and Suggestion Accuracy Influence the Benefits and Adoption of Word Suggestions. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 714, 13 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445725Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Astrid Schepman and Paul Rodway. 2020. Initial validation of the general attitudes towards Artificial Intelligence Scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 1 (2020), 100014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Weiyan Shi, Xuewei Wang, Yoo Jung Oh, Jingwen Zhang, Saurav Sahay, and Zhou Yu. 2020. Effects of Persuasive Dialogues: Testing Bot Identities and Inquiry Strategies. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Apr 2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376843Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Peter Stone, Rodney Brooks, Erik Brynjolfsson, Ryan Calo, Oren Etzioni, Greg Hager, Julia Hirschberg, Shivaram Kalyanakrishnan, Ece Kamar, Sarit Kraus, 2016. Artificial intelligence and life in 2030: the one hundred year study on artificial intelligence. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Sandeep Subramanian, Raymond Li, Jonathan Pilault, and Christopher Pal. 2019. On extractive and abstractive neural document summarization with transformer language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.03186(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. S. Shyam Sundar. 2007. The MAIN Model : A Heuristic Approach to Understanding Technology Effects on Credibility.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Joseph B Walther. 1996. Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication research 23, 1 (1996), 3–43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Joseph B Walther. 2011. Theories of computer-mediated communication and interpersonal relations. The handbook of interpersonal communication 4 (2011), 443–479.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Joseph B. Walther. 2015. Social Information Processing Theory (CMC). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic192 arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic192Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Jennifer Wang and Angela Moulden. 2021. AI Trust Score: A User-Centered Approach to Building, Designing, and Measuring the Success of Intelligent Workplace Features. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3443452Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Darcy Warkentin, Michael Woodworth, Jeffrey T. Hancock, and Nicole Cormier. 2010. Warrants and Deception in Computer Mediated Communication. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Savannah, Georgia, USA) (CSCW ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/1718918.1718922Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Rui Yan. 2018. ” Chitty-Chitty-Chat Bot”: Deep Learning for Conversational AI.. In IJCAI, Vol. 18. 5520–5526.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Xi Yang and Marco Aurisicchio. 2021. Designing Conversational Agents: A Self-Determination Theory Approach. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 256, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445445Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Will AI Console Me when I Lose my Pet? Understanding Perceptions of AI-Mediated Email Writing

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2022
        10459 pages
        ISBN:9781450391573
        DOI:10.1145/3491102

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 29 April 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format