Xiaoyi Xue

Saumik Shashwat, Xiaoyi Xue, Benjamin Charles Germain Lee

In this paper, we explore user experience and perception of serendipity in information seeking for digital collections through a human-centered design lens. Beginning with an exploratory scoping literature review, we collated the theoretical foundations of serendipity, serendipity in information seeking, search user interfaces, and digital collections. By positioning researchers interacting with digital collections as our primary stakeholders, we utilized a mixed-methods approach involving an online survey study (N = 30). We primarily inquired study participants about the digital collections they worked with, their information seeking behavior, system user experience, and perception of serendipity. Results show that participants with both broad and specific goals, depending on the situation, reported a higher perception of serendipity than participants with specific goals. We found correlations between certain aspects of serendipitous digital environment and perception of serendipity, along with the aspects of former that influence the latter: the system providing more opportunities for unexpected interactions with information, ideas, or resources while seeking information in digital collections corresponded to higher user perceptions of serendipity. We also found correlations between serendipity and autobiographically-identified key research metrics, including a strong positive alignment among learning, collaboration, and value change. Moreover, results indicated mixed sentiments toward AI-facilitated serendipity features. Lastly, possible system design directions to facilitate serendipity in information seeking are discussed.

Pitch Sinlapanuntakul, Aayushi Dangol, Xiaoyi Xue et al.

As AI integrates into design practice, designers increasingly use generative AI tools to envision AI-enabled solutions, positioning AI as both design tool and design material. This dual role creates recursive value tensions distinct from traditional design work. We engaged 18 designers in a concept envisioning activity and interviews to understand how they navigate values and recognize potential harms in this context. Our analysis reveals that (i) designers engage in reciprocal reflection-in-action with AI; (ii) this process surfaces multi-level value tensions across tool, designer, and concept; (iii) designers demonstrate greater attunement to harm recognition as a primary design signal than to articulating positive value fulfillment; and (iv) designers exercise anticipatory judgment through meta-design reasoning about how tool assumptions risk propagating into designed concepts and future use contexts. We extend Schon's reflection-in-action framework and discuss implications for redesigning AI-mediated design tools, supporting harm-centered reasoning, and positioning design as foundational to AI development.