arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09061

Supporting Allyship in Virtual Collaboration with Artificial Intelligence: A Scenario-Based Study

Crescentia Jung·Ricardo E. Gonzalez Penuela·Prashita Biswas·Seungyoon Kwon·Shiri Azenkot
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Recent research has revealed that accessibility in virtual collaboration is not only a technical problem but also depends on allyship: the informal, interpersonal practices through which people support others' accessibility needs. Yet little research has examined how artificial intelligence (AI) might support allyship in collaborative accessibility contexts. To address this gap, we conducted a study where 18 participants (10 disabled, 8 non-disabled) reflected on four allyship scenarios with novel AI tools. Participants valued AI designs that they anticipated could help teammates express, interpret, and coordinate around access needs by reducing repeated disclosure and making allyship more actionable. At the same time, participants raised concerns when AI acted without consent, misrepresented users' intentions, or displaced the interpersonal work of allyship. Based on our findings, we introduce allyship-support tools as a class of accessibility technologies, offer design guidelines, and discuss AI in particular as a means of supporting allyship.

Explore related subjects

cs.HC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Crescentia Jung, Ricardo E. Gonzalez Penuela, Prashita Biswas, Seungyoon Kwon, Shiri Azenkot. 2026-10-06. Supporting Allyship in Virtual Collaboration with Artificial Intelligence: A Scenario-Based Study. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09061

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Harnessing the Power of AI in Qualitative Research: Role Assignment, Engagement, and User Perceptions of AI-Generated Follow-Up Questions in Semi-Structured Interviews

Semi-structured interviews highly rely on the quality of follow-up questions, yet interviewers' knowledge and skills may limit their depth and potentially affect outcomes. While many studies have shown the usefulness of large language models (LLMs) for qualitative analysis, their possibility in the data collection process remains underexplored. We adopt an AI-driven "Wizard-of-Oz" setup to investigate how real-time LLM support in generating follow-up questions shapes semi-structured interviews. Through a study with 17 participants, we examine the value of LLM-generated follow-up questions, the evolving division of roles, relationships, collaborative behaviors, and responsibilities between interviewers and AI. Our findings (1) provide empirical evidence of the strengths and limitations of AI-generated follow-up questions (AGQs); (2) introduce a Human-AI collaboration framework in this interview context; and (3) propose human-centered design guidelines for AI-assisted interviewing. We position LLMs as complements, not replacements, to human judgment, and highlight pathways for integrating AI into qualitative data collection.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

An LLM-Native Psychometric Instrument Reveals a Self-Report--Behavior Gap Across 25 Models

Do large language models' (LLMs') answers to self-report questionnaires predict how they behave? Prior work finds they do not, but it uses human personality inventories, so the gap could reflect borrowed human constructs rather than LLM self-report itself. We test this with a self-report instrument built from LLM-specific behaviors (e.g., over-refusal, unsolicited disclaimers) whose structure is derived bottom-up. Administering 300 items 30 times to 25 LLMs from 17 developers yields five replicable, reliable factors (Tucker $ϕ\geq .957$, $α\geq .930$). We compare these self-reports with 2,500 open-ended behavioral samples rated by 151 humans and an LLM-judge ensemble. Humans and judges agree about model behavior ($\bar{r} = .51$), but self-report barely tracks human ratings ($\bar{r} = .09$, 95% CI $[-.07, .18]$) or rater-free text measures, and correcting for criterion unreliability leaves four of five factors near zero. Verbosity is the partial exception ($r = .40$, 71% of its reliability ceiling). On Responsiveness, self-report tracks LLM judges more than humans ($r = .53$ vs. $.18$; Steiger $p = .04$), and controlling for length and formatting does not remove this: agreement between LLM judges and LLM self-report is weak evidence that either tracks human judgment.

cs.HC↗
arXiv2026

DataCanvas-EDU: An Agentic Framework for Instructor-Guided Synthetic Data Generation in Business Analytics Education

Business analytics education requires diverse datasets to support different learning objectives, student backgrounds, and analytical tasks. Real-world data can be difficult to obtain and offer limited flexibility for adapting a case to a particular course. Even when suitable data are available, instructors must investigate the patterns, verify the results, and prepare assignments and reference solutions, requiring substantial time and effort. The use of large language models (LLMs) introduces an additional concern about training data contamination. Widely used public datasets often have extensive tutorials and worked analyses that models may have encountered during training. Students may therefore receive explanations drawn from existing analyses without practicing how to investigate unfamiliar data in collaboration with AI. This paper presents DataCanvas-EDU, an agentic framework for instructor-guided synthetic data generation in business analytics education. Instructors specify teaching goals and intended patterns through conversation, while an AI agent writes generation code, checks the resulting data, and prepares assignments, reference analyses, and rubrics. Four phases, Plan, Create, Verify / Test Analysis, and Evaluate, organize the process and support instructor review and revision. The framework is intended to simplify case preparation while creating opportunities for students to investigate newly designed patterns with AI. We illustrate the approach with WindowDash, a food delivery case containing 15,000 orders and nine designed patterns. DataCanvas-EDU is packaged as a reusable AI Agent Skill for compatible agent environments, with the package and installation instructions available at https://github.com/BANG23333/datacanvas-edu

cs.HC↗