arXiv preprint ·
In-Browser Human-AI Co-Writing for Counterspeech: An Exploratory User Study of Agency, Perceived Response Quality, and Time
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Writing counterspeech that challenges online hate speech can be cognitively and emotionally demanding, whereas fully automated generation may weaken users' sense of voice and responsibility. We present an in-browser AI-assisted co-writing tool that enables users to contribute their own ideas and offers three editable suggestions generated by a large language model using dynamically retrieved hate speech-counterspeech examples from the Multitarget CONAN dataset. We evaluated the tool in an exploratory within-subject study with ten participants, complemented by think-aloud observations and semi-structured interviews with half of the participants. Participants wrote responses to three self-selected hate speech instances without assistance and then repeated the task with the tool. Final responses were subsequently peer-rated for empathy, non-toxicity, relevance, specificity, and persuasiveness. Participants evaluated the interface positively, and qualitative accounts linked user input, selection among alternatives, and small edits to perceived agency and responsibility. Assisted responses received higher descriptive mean ratings across all five proxies, with the largest difference for empathy. Mean composition time increased from 2.52 to 3.88 minutes. Qualitative findings further revealed a tension between empathy-oriented outputs and users' desire to express legitimate anger or direct disagreement. We contribute exploratory design guidance for treating AI-assisted counterspeech as deliberative co-writing rather than automated text production.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Social & Information Networks
Do "True" and "False" Add Up to One? Complement Consistency in LLM-Agent Opinion Simulations
Social-HUMINT: An LLM-Augmented Unified Framework for Measuring Social Media Exposure
Learning the Past from the Future: Retrospective Reconstruction in Temporal Interaction Networks
Intergroup Bias Predicts Expressions of Social Judgment and Empathy in the r/AmITheAsshole Reddit Community
Fear Doesn't Go Viral, It Lingers: Spread, Affect, and Discourse of Food-Fear Content on TikTok
Get the few papers worth your time in Social & Information Networks every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.