Pith. sign in

REVIEW

An Autoethnographic Case Study of Generative Artificial Intelligence's Utility for Accessibility

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 2308.09924 v2 pith:KIEMG7NT submitted 2023-08-19 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords disabilitiesartificialgenerativeintelligencepeopleableismaccessibilityaccessibility-related
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

With the recent rapid rise in Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) tools, it is imperative that we understand their impact on people with disabilities, both positive and negative. However, although we know that AI in general poses both risks and opportunities for people with disabilities, little is known specifically about GAI in particular. To address this, we conducted a three-month autoethnography of our use of GAI to meet personal and professional needs as a team of researchers with and without disabilities. Our findings demonstrate a wide variety of potential accessibility-related uses for GAI while also highlighting concerns around verifiability, training data, ableism, and false promises.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Pith tools