"I followed what felt right, not what I was told": Autonomy, Coaching, and Recognizing Bias Through AI-Mediated Dialogue

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.11274v1
• Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 20:06:56 GMT
• Title: "I followed what felt right, not what I was told": Autonomy, Coaching, and Recognizing Bias Through AI-Mediated Dialogue
• Abstract summary: We present an experiment testing how AI-mediated dialogue influences recognition of ableism.<n>160 participants completed a pre-test, intervention, and a post-test across four conditions: AI nudges toward bias (Bias-Directed), inclusion (Neutral-Directed), unguided dialogue (Self-Directed)<n> Quantitative results showed dialogue-based conditions produced stronger recognition than Reading, though trajectories diverged: biased nudges improved differentiation of bias from neutrality but increased overall negativity.<n>We contribute a validated vignette corpus, an AI-mediated intervention platform, and design implications highlighting trade-offs conversational systems face when integrating bias-related nudges
• Score: 16.27769557566952
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Ableist microaggressions remain pervasive in everyday interactions, yet interventions to help people recognize them are limited. We present an experiment testing how AI-mediated dialogue influences recognition of ableism. 160 participants completed a pre-test, intervention, and a post-test across four conditions: AI nudges toward bias (Bias-Directed), inclusion (Neutral-Directed), unguided dialogue (Self-Directed), and a text-only non-dialogue (Reading). Participants rated scenarios on standardness of social experience and emotional impact; those in dialogue-based conditions also provided qualitative reflections. Quantitative results showed dialogue-based conditions produced stronger recognition than Reading, though trajectories diverged: biased nudges improved differentiation of bias from neutrality but increased overall negativity. Inclusive or no nudges remained more balanced, while Reading participants showed weaker gains and even declines. Qualitative findings revealed biased nudges were often rejected, while inclusive nudges were adopted as scaffolding. We contribute a validated vignette corpus, an AI-mediated intervention platform, and design implications highlighting trade-offs conversational systems face when integrating bias-related nudges.

Related papers

• It Matters How You Say It: Exploring Rhetorical Patterns for AI-Assisted Information Evaluation [37.970286982681344]
  We investigate eight rhetorical patterns known to induce contemplation.<n>We find that Scaffold Explanation were associated with the highest accuracy gains.<n>We discuss the implications of designing conversational agents with varied rhetorical styles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T07:36:25Z)
• Divergent Paths to Depolarization: Dialogue Design Determines the Prosocial Benefits of AI-Assisted Political Argumentation [11.18468073756501]
  Argumentative dialogues across political divides can reduce polarization.<n>How the format of human-AI dialogues shapes their benefits remains unclear.<n>These findings highlight dialogue design as a key determinant of effective AI-mediated behavioral interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-22T17:51:10Z)
• Voice-based debate with an AI adversary is associated with increased divergent ideation [0.0]
  Concerns that interacting with generative AI homogenizes human cognition are largely based on evidence from text-based interactions.<n>This study examines whether these patterns depend on communication modality rather than on AI itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-28T01:23:38Z)
• Reflecting Twice before Speaking with Empathy: Self-Reflective Alternating Inference for Empathy-Aware End-to-End Spoken Dialogue [53.95386201009769]
  We introduce EmpathyEval, a descriptive natural-language-based evaluation model for assessing empathetic quality in spoken dialogues.<n>We propose ReEmpathy, an end-to-end Spoken Language Models that enhances empathetic dialogue through a novel Empathetic Self-Reflective Alternating Inference mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-26T09:04:50Z)
• The Ideological Turing Test for Moderation of Outgroup Affective Animosity [3.9727752701702728]
  We introduce and test the Ideological Turing Test, a gamified framework requiring participants to adopt and defend opposing viewpoints.<n>We measured changes in affective animosity and ideological position immediately post-intervention and at 2-6 week follow-up.<n>For ideological position, adopting the opposite perspective led to significant immediate movement across modalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-13T05:19:45Z)
• Ensembling Large Language Models to Characterize Affective Dynamics in Student-AI Tutor Dialogues [18.497635186707008]
  This work introduces the first ensemble-LLM framework for large-scale affect sensing in tutoring dialogues.<n>We analyzed two semesters' worth of 16,986 conversational turns exchanged between PyTutor, an AI tutor, and 261 undergraduate learners across three U.S. institutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T04:43:56Z)
• Aligning Spoken Dialogue Models from User Interactions [55.192134724622235]
  We propose a novel preference alignment framework to improve spoken dialogue models on realtime conversations from user interactions.<n>We create a dataset of more than 150,000 preference pairs from raw multi-turn speech conversations annotated with AI feedback.<n>Our findings shed light on the importance of a well-calibrated balance among various dynamics, crucial for natural real-time speech dialogue systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-26T16:45:20Z)
• Context Does Matter: Implications for Crowdsourced Evaluation Labels in Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems [57.16442740983528]
  Crowdsourced labels play a crucial role in evaluating task-oriented dialogue systems. Previous studies suggest using only a portion of the dialogue context in the annotation process. This study investigates the influence of dialogue context on annotation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T17:56:39Z)
• The More Similar, the Better? Associations between Latent Semantic Similarity and Emotional Experiences Differ across Conversation Contexts [39.58317527488534]
  Latent semantic similarity (LSS) is a measure of the similarity of information exchanges in a conversation.<n>This work highlights the importance of context in understanding the emotional correlates of LSS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-22T06:37:45Z)
• What Went Wrong? Explaining Overall Dialogue Quality through Utterance-Level Impacts [15.018259942339448]
  This paper presents a novel approach to automated analysis of conversation logs that learns the relationship between user-system interactions and overall dialogue quality. Our approach learns the impact of each interaction from the overall user rating without utterance-level annotation. Experiments show that the automated analysis from our model agrees with expert judgments, making this work the first to show that such weakly-supervised learning of utterance-level quality prediction is highly achievable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-31T19:12:29Z)
• Adaptive Bridge between Training and Inference for Dialogue [36.64781557775641]
  We propose a novel adaptive switching mechanism, which learns to automatically transit between ground-truth learning and generated learning. Our method achieves a significant improvement in terms of metric-based evaluation and human evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-22T02:43:27Z)
• DynaEval: Unifying Turn and Dialogue Level Evaluation [60.66883575106898]
  We propose DynaEval, a unified automatic evaluation framework. It is capable of performing turn-level evaluation, but also holistically considers the quality of the entire dialogue. Experiments show that DynaEval significantly outperforms the state-of-the-art dialogue coherence model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T12:23:18Z)
• Will I Sound Like Me? Improving Persona Consistency in Dialogues through Pragmatic Self-Consciousness [62.55060760615656]
  Recent models tackling consistency often train with additional Natural Language Inference (NLI) labels or attach trained extra modules to the generative agent for maintaining consistency. Inspired by social cognition and pragmatics, we endow existing dialogue agents with public self-consciousness on the fly through an imaginary listener. Our approach, based on the Rational Speech Acts framework, can enforce dialogue agents to refrain from uttering contradiction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-13T08:16:16Z)
• You Impress Me: Dialogue Generation via Mutual Persona Perception [62.89449096369027]
  The research in cognitive science suggests that understanding is an essential signal for a high-quality chit-chat conversation. Motivated by this, we propose P2 Bot, a transmitter-receiver based framework with the aim of explicitly modeling understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-11T12:51:07Z)

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.