REVIEW 1 cited by
Chatbots for Data Collection in Surveys: A Comparison of Four Theory-Based Interview Probes
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
read the original abstract
Surveys are a widespread method for collecting data at scale, but their rigid structure often limits the depth of qualitative insights obtained. While interviews naturally yield richer responses, they are challenging to conduct across diverse locations and large participant pools. To partially bridge this gap, we investigate the potential of using LLM-based chatbots to support qualitative data collection through interview probes embedded in surveys. We assess four theory-based interview probes: descriptive, idiographic, clarifying, and explanatory. Through a split-plot study design (N=64), we compare the probes' impact on response quality and user experience across three key stages of HCI research: exploration, requirements gathering, and evaluation. Our results show that probes facilitate the collection of high-quality survey data, with specific probes proving effective at different research stages. We contribute practical and methodological implications for using chatbots as research tools to enrich qualitative data collection.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
"If we misunderstand the client, we misspend 100 hours": Exploring conversational AI and response types for information elicitation
In a 2x2 experiment with 50 mock clients, conversational AI and choice-based responses improved response clarity but lowered perceived dependability of an elicitation tool.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.