Alicia Guo

Alicia Guo, Carly Schnitzler, Katy Gero

How might we govern a language model run for and by creative writers? While generative AI use is on the rise, many language models are created and owned in ways that limit writers' consent, participation, and control. We report on four workshops where over one hundred creative writers came up with and analyzed metaphors for language model governance, resulting in over two hundred metaphors: objects, places, processes, groups, and infrastructure that support reasoning about language model governance. What if a language model was like a community garden? Or a seed bank? Or the bathroom in a dive bar? We report on four themes: (1) the importance of consent, (2) how to define community boundaries, (3) ways to give contributor recognition, and (4) trade-offs in scale of language models. These metaphors point towards smaller, open models that encode group values. We discuss concrete ways to make community language models a reality.

Inyoung Cheong, Alicia Guo, Mina Lee et al.

As AI integrates in various types of human writing, calls for transparency around AI assistance are growing. However, if transparency operates on uneven ground and certain identity groups bear a heavier cost for being honest, then the burden of openness becomes asymmetrical. This study investigates how AI disclosure statement affects perceptions of writing quality, and whether these effects vary by the author's race and gender. Through a large-scale controlled experiment, both human raters (n = 1,970) and LLM raters (n = 2,520) evaluated a single human-written news article while disclosure statements and author demographics were systematically varied. This approach reflects how both human and algorithmic decisions now influence access to opportunities (e.g., hiring, promotion) and social recognition (e.g., content recommendation algorithms). We find that both human and LLM raters consistently penalize disclosed AI use. However, only LLM raters exhibit demographic interaction effects: they favor articles attributed to women or Black authors when no disclosure is present. But these advantages disappear when AI assistance is revealed. These findings illuminate the complex relationships between AI disclosure and author identity, highlighting disparities between machine and human evaluation patterns.