AI Where It Matters: Where, Why, and How Developers Want AI Support in Daily Work

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00762v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2025 10:51:03 GMT
• Title: AI Where It Matters: Where, Why, and How Developers Want AI Support in Daily Work
• Authors: Rudrajit Choudhuri, Carmen Badea, Christian Bird, Jenna Butler, Rob DeLine, Brian Houck,
• Abstract summary: Generative AI is reshaping software work, yet we lack clear guidance on where developers most need and want support.<n>We report a large-scale, mixed-methods study of N=860 developers that examines where, why, and how they seek or limit AI help.<n>Our results offer concrete, contextual guidance for delivering AI where it matters to developers and their work.
• Score: 3.1984206905916
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI is reshaping software work, yet we lack clear guidance on where developers most need and want support, and how to design it responsibly. We report a large-scale, mixed-methods study of N=860 developers that examines where, why, and how they seek or limit AI help, providing the first task-aware, empirically validated mapping from developers' perceptions of their tasks to AI adoption patterns and responsible AI priorities. Using cognitive appraisal theory, we show that task evaluations predict openness to and use of AI, revealing distinct patterns: strong current use and a desire for improvement in core work (e.g., coding, testing); high demand to reduce toil (e.g., documentation, operations); and clear limits for identity- and relationship-centric work (e.g., mentoring). Priorities for responsible AI support vary by context: reliability and security for systems-facing tasks; transparency, alignment, and steerability to maintain control; and fairness and inclusiveness for human-facing work. Our results offer concrete, contextual guidance for delivering AI where it matters to developers and their work.

Related papers

• The SPACE of AI: Real-World Lessons on AI's Impact on Developers [0.807084206814932]
  We study how developers perceive AI's influence across the dimensions of the SPACE framework: Satisfaction, Performance, Activity, Collaboration and Efficiency.<n>We find that AI is broadly adopted and widely seen as enhancing productivity, particularly for routine tasks.<n>Developers report increased efficiency and satisfaction, with less evidence of impact on collaboration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-31T21:45:54Z)
• Code with Me or for Me? How Increasing AI Automation Transforms Developer Workflows [60.04362496037186]
  We present the first controlled study of developer interactions with coding agents.<n>We evaluate two leading copilot and agentic coding assistants.<n>Our results show agents can assist developers in ways that surpass copilots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T20:12:54Z)
• Explainability for Embedding AI: Aspirations and Actuality [1.8130068086063336]
  Explainable AI (XAI) may allow developers to understand better the systems they build.<n>Existing XAI systems still fall short of this aspiration.<n>We see an unmet need to provide developers with adequate support mechanisms to cope with this complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-20T14:20:01Z)
• General Scales Unlock AI Evaluation with Explanatory and Predictive Power [57.7995945974989]
  benchmarking has guided progress in AI, but it has offered limited explanatory and predictive power for general-purpose AI systems.<n>We introduce general scales for AI evaluation that can explain what common AI benchmarks really measure.<n>Our fully-automated methodology builds on 18 newly-crafted rubrics that place instance demands on general scales that do not saturate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-09T01:13:56Z)
• Towards Decoding Developer Cognition in the Age of AI Assistants [9.887133861477233]
  We propose a controlled observational study combining physiological measurements (EEG and eye tracking) with interaction data to examine developers' use of AI-assisted programming tools.<n>We will recruit professional developers to complete programming tasks both with and without AI assistance while measuring their cognitive load and task completion time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-05T23:25:21Z)
• Imagining and building wise machines: The centrality of AI metacognition [78.76893632793497]
  We examine what is known about human wisdom and sketch a vision of its AI counterpart.<n>We argue that AI systems particularly struggle with metacognition.<n>We discuss how wise AI might be benchmarked, trained, and implemented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T18:10:10Z)
• Engineering Trustworthy AI: A Developer Guide for Empirical Risk Minimization [53.80919781981027]
  Key requirements for trustworthy AI can be translated into design choices for the components of empirical risk minimization. We hope to provide actionable guidance for building AI systems that meet emerging standards for trustworthiness of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T07:53:32Z)
• Using AI-Based Coding Assistants in Practice: State of Affairs, Perceptions, and Ways Forward [9.177785129949]
  We aim to better understand how specifically developers are using AI assistants. We carried out a large-scale survey aimed at how AI assistants are used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T23:10:43Z)
• The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants [53.89899371095332]
  This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user. We consider the deployment of advanced assistants at a societal scale, focusing on cooperation, equity and access, misinformation, economic impact, the environment and how best to evaluate advanced AI assistants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-24T23:18:46Z)
• Seamful XAI: Operationalizing Seamful Design in Explainable AI [59.89011292395202]
  Mistakes in AI systems are inevitable, arising from both technical limitations and sociotechnical gaps. We propose that seamful design can foster AI explainability by revealing sociotechnical and infrastructural mismatches. We explore this process with 43 AI practitioners and real end-users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-12T21:54:05Z)
• Do We Need Explainable AI in Companies? Investigation of Challenges, Expectations, and Chances from Employees' Perspective [0.8057006406834467]
  Using AI poses new requirements for companies and their employees, including transparency and comprehensibility of AI systems. The field of Explainable AI (XAI) aims to address these issues. This project report paper provides insights into employees' needs and attitudes towards (X)AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-07T13:11:28Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.