A Case Study on Assessing AI Assistant Competence in Narrative Interviews.

Q2 Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
F1000Research Pub Date : 2024-10-04 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/f1000research.151952.2
Chitat Chan, Yunmeng Zhao, Jiahui Zhao
{"title":"A Case Study on Assessing AI Assistant Competence in Narrative Interviews.","authors":"Chitat Chan, Yunmeng Zhao, Jiahui Zhao","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.151952.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Researchers are leading the development of AI designed to conduct interviews. These developments imply that AI's role is expanding from mere data analysis to becoming a tool for social researchers to interact with and comprehend their subjects. Yet, academic discussions have not addressed the potential impacts of AI on narrative interviews. In narrative interviews, the method of collecting data is a collaborative effort. The interviewer also contributes to exploring and shaping the interviewee's story. A compelling narrative interviewer has to display critical skills, such as maintaining a specific questioning order, showing empathy, and helping participants delve into and build their own stories.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This case study configured an OpenAI Assistant on WhatsApp to conduct narrative interviews with a human participant. The participant shared the same story in two distinct conversations: first, following a standard cycle and answering questions earnestly, and second, deliberately sidetracking the assistant from the main interview path as instructed by the researcher, to test how well the metrics could reflect the deliberate differences between different conversations. The AI's performance was evaluated through conversation analysis and specific narrative indicators, focusing on its adherence to the interview structure, empathy, narrative coherence, complexity, and support for human participant agency. The study sought to answer these questions: 1) How can the proposed metrics help us, as social researchers without a technical background, understand the quality of the AI-driven interviews in this study? 2) What do these findings contribute to our discussion on using AI in narrative interviews for social research? 3) What further research could these results inspire?</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings show to what extent the AI maintained structure and adaptability in conversations, illustrating its potential to support personalized, flexible narrative interviews based on specific needs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These results suggest that social researchers without a technical background can use observation-based metrics to gauge how well an AI assistant conducts narrative interviews. They also prompt reflection on AI's role in narrative interviews and spark further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"13 ","pages":"601"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11564924/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.151952.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Researchers are leading the development of AI designed to conduct interviews. These developments imply that AI's role is expanding from mere data analysis to becoming a tool for social researchers to interact with and comprehend their subjects. Yet, academic discussions have not addressed the potential impacts of AI on narrative interviews. In narrative interviews, the method of collecting data is a collaborative effort. The interviewer also contributes to exploring and shaping the interviewee's story. A compelling narrative interviewer has to display critical skills, such as maintaining a specific questioning order, showing empathy, and helping participants delve into and build their own stories.

Methods: This case study configured an OpenAI Assistant on WhatsApp to conduct narrative interviews with a human participant. The participant shared the same story in two distinct conversations: first, following a standard cycle and answering questions earnestly, and second, deliberately sidetracking the assistant from the main interview path as instructed by the researcher, to test how well the metrics could reflect the deliberate differences between different conversations. The AI's performance was evaluated through conversation analysis and specific narrative indicators, focusing on its adherence to the interview structure, empathy, narrative coherence, complexity, and support for human participant agency. The study sought to answer these questions: 1) How can the proposed metrics help us, as social researchers without a technical background, understand the quality of the AI-driven interviews in this study? 2) What do these findings contribute to our discussion on using AI in narrative interviews for social research? 3) What further research could these results inspire?

Results: The findings show to what extent the AI maintained structure and adaptability in conversations, illustrating its potential to support personalized, flexible narrative interviews based on specific needs.

Conclusions: These results suggest that social researchers without a technical background can use observation-based metrics to gauge how well an AI assistant conducts narrative interviews. They also prompt reflection on AI's role in narrative interviews and spark further research.

在叙述式访谈中评估人工智能助理能力的案例研究。
背景介绍研究人员正在引领旨在进行访谈的人工智能的发展。这些发展意味着,人工智能的作用正在从单纯的数据分析扩展到成为社会研究人员与研究对象互动和理解研究对象的工具。然而,学术讨论尚未涉及人工智能对叙事访谈的潜在影响。在叙事访谈中,收集数据的方法是一种协作努力。采访者也为探索和塑造被采访者的故事做出了贡献。一个有说服力的叙事访谈者必须展现出关键的技能,例如保持特定的提问顺序、表现出同理心,以及帮助参与者深入了解和构建自己的故事:本案例研究在 WhatsApp 上配置了一个 OpenAI 助手,与一名人类参与者进行叙事访谈。参与者在两次不同的对话中分享了同一个故事:第一次,按照标准周期认真回答问题;第二次,按照研究人员的指示,故意让助手偏离主要访谈路径,以测试度量指标能在多大程度上反映不同对话之间的刻意差异。人工智能的表现是通过对话分析和具体的叙述指标来评估的,重点是其对访谈结构的遵循、同理心、叙述连贯性、复杂性以及对人类参与者代理的支持。本研究试图回答以下问题1) 作为没有技术背景的社会研究人员,所提出的指标如何帮助我们理解本研究中人工智能驱动访谈的质量?2) 这些发现对我们讨论在社会研究中使用人工智能叙事访谈有何帮助?3) 这些结果对进一步研究有何启发?研究结果显示了人工智能在多大程度上保持了对话的结构性和适应性,说明了人工智能在支持基于特定需求的个性化、灵活的叙事访谈方面的潜力:这些结果表明,没有技术背景的社会研究人员可以使用基于观察的指标来衡量人工智能助手进行叙述式访谈的效果如何。这些结果还促使人们思考人工智能在叙事访谈中的作用,并引发进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
F1000Research
F1000Research Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍: F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信