CYApr 21
Frictionless Love: Associations Between AI Companion Roles and Behavioral AddictionVibhor Agarwal, Ke Zhou, Edyta Paulina Bogucka et al.
AI companion chatbots increasingly shape how people seek social and emotional connection, sometimes substituting for relationships with romantic partners, friends, teachers, or even therapists. When these systems adopt those metaphorical roles, they are not neutral: such roles structure people's ways of interacting, distribute perceived AI harms and benefits, and may reflect behavioral addiction signs. Yet these role-dependent risks remain poorly understood. We analyze 248,830 posts from seven prominent Reddit communities describing interactions with AI companions. We identify ten recurring metaphorical roles (for example, soulmate, philosopher, and coach) and show that each role supports distinct ways of interacting. We then extract the perceived AI harms and AI benefits associated with these role-specific interactions and link them to behavioral addiction signs, all of which has been inferred from the text in the posts. AI soulmate companions are associated with romance-centered ways of interacting, offering emotional support but also introducing emotional manipulation and distress, culminating in strong attachment. In contrast, AI coach and guardian companions are associated with practical benefits such as personal growth and task support, yet are nonetheless more frequently associated with behavioral addiction signs such as daily life disruptions and damage to offline relationships. These findings show that metaphorical roles are a central ethical design concern for responsible AI companions.
HCFeb 9
Agent-Supported Foresight for AI Systemic Risks: AI Agents for Breadth, Experts for JudgmentLeon Fröhling, Alessandro Giaconia, Edyta Paulina Bogucka et al.
AI impact assessments often stress near-term risks because human judgment degrades over longer horizons, exemplifying the Collingridge dilemma: foresight is most needed when knowledge is scarcest. To address long-term systemic risks, we introduce a scalable approach that simulates in-silico agents using the strategic foresight method of the Futures Wheel. We applied it to four AI uses spanning Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs): Chatbot Companion (TRL 9, mature), AI Toy (TRL 7, medium), Griefbot (TRL 5, low), and Death App (TRL 2, conceptual). Across 30 agent runs per use, agents produced 86-110 consequences, condensed into 27-47 unique risks. To benchmark the agent outputs against human perspectives, we collected evaluations from 290 domain experts and 7 leaders, and conducted Futures Wheel sessions with 42 experts and 42 laypeople. Agents generated many systemic consequences across runs. Compared with these outputs, experts identified fewer risks, typically less systemic but judged more likely, whereas laypeople surfaced more emotionally salient concerns that were generally less systemic. We propose a hybrid foresight workflow, wherein agents broaden systemic coverage, and humans provide contextual grounding. Our dataset is available at: https://social-dynamics.net/ai-risks/foresight.
HCApr 8, 2025
The Hall of AI Fears and Hopes: Comparing the Views of AI Influencers and those of Members of the U.S. Public Through an Interactive PlatformGustavo Moreira, Edyta Paulina Bogucka, Marios Constantinides et al.
AI development is shaped by academics and industry leaders - let us call them ``influencers'' - but it is unclear how their views align with those of the public. To address this gap, we developed an interactive platform that served as a data collection tool for exploring public views on AI, including their fears, hopes, and overall sense of hopefulness. We made the platform available to 330 participants representative of the U.S. population in terms of age, sex, ethnicity, and political leaning, and compared their views with those of 100 AI influencers identified by Time magazine. The public fears AI getting out of control, while influencers emphasize regulation, seemingly to deflect attention from their alleged focus on monetizing AI's potential. Interestingly, the views of AI influencers from underrepresented groups such as women and people of color often differ from the views of underrepresented groups in the public.
HCJun 8, 2021
Cartographic Design of Cultural MapsEdyta Paulina Bogucka, Marios Constantinides, Luca Maria Aiello et al.
Throughout history, maps have been used as a tool to explore cities. They visualize a city's urban fabric through its streets, buildings, and points of interest. Besides purely navigation purposes, street names also reflect a city's culture through its commemorative practices. Therefore, cultural maps that unveil socio-cultural characteristics encoded in street names could potentially raise citizens' historical awareness. But designing effective cultural maps is challenging, not only due to data scarcity but also due to the lack of effective approaches to engage citizens with data exploration. To address these challenges, we collected a dataset of 5,000 streets across the cities of Paris, Vienna, London, and New York, and built their cultural maps grounded on cartographic storytelling techniques. Through data exploration scenarios, we demonstrated how cultural maps engage users and allow them to discover distinct patterns in the ways these cities are gender-biased, celebrate various professions, and embrace foreign cultures.
HCJun 8, 2021
Streetonomics: Quantifying Culture Using Street NamesMelanie Bancilhon, Marios Constantinides, Edyta Paulina Bogucka et al.
Quantifying a society's value system is important because it suggests what people deeply care about -- it reflects who they actually are and, more importantly, who they will like to be. This cultural quantification has been typically done by studying literary production. However, a society's value system might well be implicitly quantified based on the decisions that people took in the past and that were mediated by what they care about. It turns out that one class of these decisions is visible in ordinary settings: it is visible in street names. We studied the names of 4,932 honorific streets in the cities of Paris, Vienna, London and New York. We chose these four cities because they were important centers of cultural influence for the Western world in the 20th century. We found that street names greatly reflect the extent to which a society is gender biased, which professions are considered elite ones, and the extent to which a city is influenced by the rest of the world. This way of quantifying a society's value system promises to inform new methodologies in Digital Humanities; makes it possible for municipalities to reflect on their past to inform their future; and informs the design of everyday's educational tools that promote historical awareness in a playful way.