Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Human-AI Collaboration for UX Evaluation: Effects of Explanation and Synchronization

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 2112.12387 v1 pith:AAN3QURQ submitted 2021-12-23 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords explanationscollaborationevaluatorssynchronizationevaluationtestusabilityai-assisted
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Analyzing usability test videos is arduous. Although recent research showed the promise of AI in assisting with such tasks, it remains largely unknown how AI should be designed to facilitate effective collaboration between user experience (UX) evaluators and AI. Inspired by the concepts of agency and work context in human and AI collaboration literature, we studied two corresponding design factors for AI-assisted UX evaluation: explanations and synchronization. Explanations allow AI to further inform humans how it identifies UX problems from a usability test session; synchronization refers to the two ways humans and AI collaborate: synchronously and asynchronously. We iteratively designed a tool, AI Assistant, with four versions of UIs corresponding to the two levels of explanations (with/without) and synchronization (sync/async). By adopting a hybrid wizard-of-oz approach to simulating an AI with reasonable performance, we conducted a mixed-method study with 24 UX evaluators identifying UX problems from usability test videos using AI Assistant. Our quantitative and qualitative results show that AI with explanations, regardless of being presented synchronously or asynchronously, provided better support for UX evaluators' analysis and was perceived more positively; when without explanations, synchronous AI better improved UX evaluators' performance and engagement compared to the asynchronous AI. Lastly, we present the design implications for AI-assisted UX evaluation and facilitating more effective human-AI collaboration.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The Human-AI Handshake Framework: A Bidirectional Approach to Human-AI Collaboration

    cs.HC 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A new conceptual model describes human-AI collaboration as a bidirectional 'handshake' built on information exchange, mutual learning, validation, feedback, and capability augmentation.

Pith tools