Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practice

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2310.00907 v1 pith:GSFXWNUH submitted 2023-10-02 cs.HC cs.AI

classification cs.HCcs.AI
keywords designparticipatorycurrentempiricalpracticepractitionersresearchersstate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Despite the growing consensus that stakeholders affected by AI systems should participate in their design, enormous variation and implicit disagreements exist among current approaches. For researchers and practitioners who are interested in taking a participatory approach to AI design and development, it remains challenging to assess the extent to which any participatory approach grants substantive agency to stakeholders. This article thus aims to ground what we dub the "participatory turn" in AI design by synthesizing existing theoretical literature on participation and through empirical investigation and critique of its current practices. Specifically, we derive a conceptual framework through synthesis of literature across technology design, political theory, and the social sciences that researchers and practitioners can leverage to evaluate approaches to participation in AI design. Additionally, we articulate empirical findings concerning the current state of participatory practice in AI design based on an analysis of recently published research and semi-structured interviews with 12 AI researchers and practitioners. We use these empirical findings to understand the current state of participatory practice and subsequently provide guidance to better align participatory goals and methods in a way that accounts for practical constraints.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. AISPA: User-Centric System Prompt Auditing for Large Language Model Applications

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    A human-in-the-loop audit of system prompts from 88 commercial AI products finds protective instructions nearly universal yet incomplete, with ~40% of products containing at least one user-harmful directive.

  2. ArchiveGPT: A human-centered evaluation of using a vision language model for image cataloguing

    cs.HC 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    An out-of-the-box vision language model's catalogue descriptions were detectable by humans and rated less accurate and useful than expert-written texts.

Pith tools