CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30Digital Media and Visual ArtTechnology's Impact on MediaInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Unlocking creator-AI synergy: Challenges, requirements, and design opportunities in AI-powered short-form video production

Open access
Jini Kim, Hajun Kim·2024·CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3613904.3642476
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The emergence of AI-Powered Short-Form Video Generators (ASVG) has showcased the potential to streamline production time and foster creative ideas. Despite their widespread adoption, research has underexplored ASVG, especially from creators’ perspectives. To evaluate the role of ASVG as creator-centered collaborators, we conducted mixed-method research: (1) interviews (N = 17) and (2) a participatory design workshop (N = 12) with short-form video creators. In our interviews, we investigated creators’ production process and challenges in creating short-form videos. In participatory workshops, short-form video creators envisioned AI-powered video tools, addressing their requirements and AI collaboration perceptions. Our findings indicate ASVGs can provide various advantages including inspiration, swift access to video sources, and automated highlight generation. To put things in perspective, we also underscore concerns arising from AI collaboration, including potential creator identity dilution, reduced creative output, and information bubble. We also discuss design considerations when designing ASVG to retain their creative values.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1145/3613904.3642476

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • AI has the ability to merge trends with creators' styles in short videos.

    “Additionally, prior research highlights AI's ability to merge trends with creators' styles in short videos [50]”

    From Understanding Screenwriters' Practices, Attitudes, and Future Expectations in Human-AI Co-Creation (2025) · cites this paper as [50]

    In 6 Findings > 6.1, participants propose an AI recommendation feature that would blend current trends with creators’ unique styles. This supports the concept, but the paper presents it as a desired design opportunity, not a demonstrated AI ability. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • AI is reshaping fashion design through dynamic visuals and supporting the creation of short-form social media videos.

    “As AI-generated video capabilities advance, AI is also reshaping fashion design through dynamic visuals [45, 60] and supporting the creation of short-form social media videos [50].”

    From Understanding Screenwriters' Practices, Attitudes, and Future Expectations in Human-AI Co-Creation (2025) · cites this paper as [50]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 60

  1. [1][1] Saleema Amershi, Dan Weld, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Adam Fourney, Besmira Nushi, Penny Collisson, Jina Suh, Shamsi Iqbal, Paul N Bennett, Kori Inkpen, 2019. Guidelines for human-AI interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  2. [2][2] Hemant K Bhargava. 2022. The creator economy: Managing ecosystem supply, revenue sharing, and platform design. Management Science 68, 7 (2022), 5233–5251. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] recognition through their creative work b [...] as a core part of modern market and culture
  3. [3][3] Xiang Bi and Cunchen Tang. 2020. Research on the motives affecting the behavior of short video’s creators. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 188415–188428. Crossref Google Scholar a [...] of short-form video creators’ motivation b [...] ], and a lack of motivation c [...] the key motivators for producing content
  4. [4][4] Sid Black, Stella Biderman, Eric Hallahan, Quentin Anthony, Leo Gao, Laurence Golding, Horace He, Connor Leahy, Kyle McDonell, Jason Phang, 2022. Gpt-neox-20b: An open-source autoregressive language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06745 (2022). Go to Citation Google Scholar · arXiv
  5. [5][5] Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77–101. Google Scholar a [...] a qualitative thematic analysis approach b [...] to Study 1, we conducted thematic analysis
  6. [6][6] Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020), 1877–1901. Google Scholar a [...] models such as Large Language Models (LLMs) b [...] an instruction and/or few-shot examples
  7. [7][7] Valerie A Canady. 2022. Psychiatrists collaborate with YouTube to develop MH content. Mental Health Weekly 32, 20 (2022), 7–7. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  8. [8][8] Kabdo Choi, Hyungyu Shin, Meng Xia, and Juho Kim. 2022. Algosolve: Supporting subgoal learning in algorithmic problem-solving with learnersourced microtasks. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  9. [9][9] Yoonseo Choi, Eun Jeong Kang, Min Kyung Lee, and Juho Kim. 2023. Creator-friendly Algorithms: Behaviors, Challenges, and Design Opportunities in Algorithmic Platforms. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–22. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] recognition through their creative work b [...] Following the framework of creative process c [...] as a core part of modern market and culture d [...] gravity and the need to address the issues. e [...] of YouTube recommendation algorithm f [...] analysis based on their creative process
  10. [10][10] Fernando Delgado, Solon Barocas, and Karen Levy. 2022. An uncommon task: Participatory design in legal AI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW1 (2022), 1–23. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  11. [14][14] Graham Dove and Anne-Laure Fayard. 2020. Monsters, metaphors, and machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  12. [16][16] Xin Du, Toni Liechty, Carla A Santos, and Jeongeun Park. 2022. ‘I want to record and share my wonderful journey’: Chinese Millennials’ production and sharing of short-form travel videos on TikTok or Douyin. Current Issues in Tourism 25, 21 (2022), 3412–3424. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  13. [17][17] Andrea Gasparini, Ahmed Abdi Mohammed, and Gabriele Oropallo. 2018. Service design for artificial intelligence. In Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings. Linköping University Electronic Press, 1064–1073. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  14. [18][18] Xudong Gong, Qinlin Feng, Yuan Zhang, Jiangling Qin, Weijie Ding, Biao Li, Peng Jiang, and Kun Gai. 2022. Real-time Short Video Recommendation on Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 3103–3112. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] drawn significant interest from the public b [...] in traffic and increased public interests
  15. [19][19] Katerina Gorkovenko, Daniel J Burnett, James K Thorp, Daniel Richards, and Dave Murray-Rust. 2020. Exploring the future of data-driven product design. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  16. [20][20] Christina Harrington, Sheena Erete, and Anne Marie Piper. 2019. Deconstructing community-based collaborative design: Towards more equitable participatory design engagements. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–25. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  17. [21][21] Jianchao He, Miao Hu, Yipeng Zhou, and Di Wu. 2020. LiveClip: towards intelligent mobile short-form video streaming with deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM Workshop on Network and Operating Systems Support for Digital Audio and Video. 54–59. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  18. [24][24] Xiaoneng Jin, Mark Evans, Hua Dong, and Anqi Yao. 2021. Design heuristics for artificial intelligence: inspirational design stimuli for supporting UX designers in generating AI-powered ideas. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–8. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  19. [25][25] Jeongyeon Kim, Daeun Choi, Nicole Lee, Matt Beane, and Juho Kim. 2023. Surch: Enabling Structural Search and Comparison for Surgical Videos. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  20. [26][26] Tae Soo Kim, DaEun Choi, Yoonseo Choi, and Juho Kim. 2022. Stylette: Styling the web with natural language. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] responsibility, and self-efficacy b [...] also ensuring their sense of self-efficacy
  21. [27][27] Tae Soo Kim, Arghya Sarkar, Yoonjoo Lee, Minsuk Chang, and Juho Kim. 2023. LMCanvas: Object-Oriented Interaction to Personalize Large Language Model-Powered Writing Environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15125 (2023). Google Scholar a [...] (Artificial Intelligence) on creative work b [...] an instruction and/or few-shot examples c [...] with LLMs, enhancing their writing skills · arXiv
  22. [28][28] Hyung-Kwon Ko, Subin An, Gwanmo Park, Seung Kwon Kim, Daesik Kim, Bohyoung Kim, Jaemin Jo, and Jinwook Seo. 2022. We-toon: A Communication Support System between Writers and Artists in Collaborative Webtoon Sketch Revision. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 1–14. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  23. [30][30] Rafal Kocielnik, Saleema Amershi, and Paul N Bennett. 2019. Will you accept an imperfect ai? exploring designs for adjusting end-user expectations of ai systems. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  24. [31][31] Peter Kun, Ingrid Mulder, and Gerd Kortuem. 2018. Design enquiry through data: appropriating a data science workflow for the design process. In Proceedings of the 32nd International BCS Human Computer Interaction Conference 32. 1–12. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  25. [32][32] Mackenzie Leake, Abe Davis, Anh Truong, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2017. Computational video editing for dialogue-driven scenes.ACM Trans. Graph. 36, 4 (2017), 130–1. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  26. [33][33] Min Kyung Lee, Daniel Kusbit, Anson Kahng, Ji Tae Kim, Xinran Yuan, Allissa Chan, Daniel See, Ritesh Noothigattu, Siheon Lee, Alexandros Psomas, and Ariel D. Procaccia. 2019. WeBuildAI: Participatory Framework for Algorithmic Governance. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 3, CSCW, Article 181 (nov 2019), 35 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359283 Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar · DOI
  27. [34][34] Fan Li and Yuan Lu. 2021. Engaging end users in an ai-enabled smart service design-the application of the smart service blueprint scape (SSBS) framework. Proceedings of the Design Society 1 (2021), 1363–1372. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  28. [35][35] Tianyi Li, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Derek DeBellis, and Saleema Amershi. 2022. Assessing Human-AI Interaction Early through Factorial Surveys: A Study on the Guidelines for Human-AI Interaction. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (2022). Go to Citation Google Scholar
  29. [36][36] Q Vera Liao, Hariharan Subramonyam, Jennifer Wang, and Jennifer Wortman Vaughan. 2023. Designerly understanding: Information needs for model transparency to support design ideation for AI-powered user experience. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–21. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] specific needs. However, recent studies b [...] capabilities and complex outputs of AI
  30. [37][37] Dong Kyun Lim. 2021. A Study on the Experiential Response of Short-Form Video Users. The International Journal of Advanced Smart Convergence 10, 4 (2021), 273–277. Google Scholar a [...] drawn significant interest from the public b [...] in traffic and increased public interests
  31. [39][39] Qin Lin, Nuo Pang, and Zhiying Hong. 2021. Automated multi-modal video editing for ads video. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. 4823–4827. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  32. [40][40] Daria Loi, Thomas Lodato, Christine T Wolf, Raphael Arar, and Jeanette Blomberg. 2018. PD manifesto for AI futures. In Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Situated Actions, Workshops and Tutorial-Volume 2. 1–4. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  33. [43][43] Nirav Malsattar, Tomo Kihara, and Elisa Giaccardi. 2019. Designing and Prototyping from the Perspective of AI in the Wild. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1083–1088. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  34. [44][44] Omar Marzouk, Joni Salminen, Pengyi Zhang, and Bernard J Jansen. 2022. Which message? Which channel? Which customer? Exploring response rates in multi-channel marketing using short-form advertising. Data and Information Management 6, 1 (2022), 100008. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  35. [46][46] Devadas Menon. 2022. Factors influencing Instagram Reels usage behaviours: An examination of motives, contextual age and narcissism. Telematics and Informatics Reports 5 (2022), 100007. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  36. [47][47] Steven Moore, Q Vera Liao, and Hariharan Subramonyam. 2023. fAIlureNotes: Supporting Designers in Understanding the Limits of AI Models for Computer Vision Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–19. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  37. [48][48] Iohanna Nicenboim, Elisa Giaccardi, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard, Anuradha Venugopal Reddy, Yolande Strengers, James Pierce, and Johan Redström. 2020. More-than-human design and AI: in conversation with agents. In Companion publication of the 2020 ACM designing interactive systems conference. 397–400. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  38. [50][50] Eunji Park, Yugyeong Jung, Inyeop Kim, and Uichin Lee. 2023. Charlie and the Semi-Automated Factory: Data-Driven Operator Behavior and Performance Modeling for Human-Machine Collaborative Systems. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–16. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  39. [51][51] Sebastiaan Theodorus Michaël Peek, Eveline JM Wouters, Katrien G Luijkx, and Hubertus JM Vrijhoef. 2016. What it takes to successfully implement technology for aging in place: focus groups with stakeholders. Journal of medical Internet research 18, 5 (2016), e5253. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  40. [52][52] Jennifer Pierre, Roderic Crooks, Morgan Currie, Britt Paris, and Irene Pasquetto. 2021. Getting Ourselves Together: Data-centered participatory design research & epistemic burden. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–11. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  41. [54][54] Aditya Ramesh, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alex Nichol, Casey Chu, and Mark Chen. 2022. Hierarchical text-conditional image generation with clip latents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06125 1, 2 (2022), 3. Go to Citation Google Scholar · arXiv
  42. [55][55] Aditya Ramesh, Mikhail Pavlov, Gabriel Goh, Scott Gray, Chelsea Voss, Alec Radford, Mark Chen, and Ilya Sutskever. 2021. Zero-shot text-to-image generation. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 8821–8831. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  43. [56][56] Isabella Scandurra and Marie Sjölinder. 2013. Participatory design with seniors: Design of future services and iterative refinements of interactive eHealth services for old citizens. Medicine 2.0 2, 2 (2013). Go to Citation Google Scholar
  44. [57][57] Ben Shneiderman. 2020. Human-centered artificial intelligence: Reliable, safe & trustworthy. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 36, 6 (2020), 495–504. Crossref Google Scholar a [...] responsibility, and self-efficacy b [...] also ensuring their sense of self-efficacy
  45. [58][58] Than Htut Soe. 2021. AI video editing tools. What editors want and how far is AI from delivering?arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.07809 (2021). Google Scholar a [...] assist video production in such platforms b [...] of AI to innovate the editing experience · arXiv
  46. [59][59] Than Htut Soe. 2021. Automation in Video Editing: Assisted Workflows in Video Editing. In AutomationXP@ CHI. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  47. [60][60] Wondwesen Tafesse and Mumin Dayan. 2023. Content creators’ participation in the creator economy: Examining the effect of creators’ content sharing frequency on user engagement behavior on digital platforms. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 73 (2023), 103357. Crossref Google Scholar a [...] recognition through their creative work b [...] as a core part of modern market and culture c [...] ], and a lack of motivation d [...] gravity and the need to address the issues.
  48. [61][61] Romal Thoppilan, Daniel De Freitas, Jamie Hall, Noam Shazeer, Apoorv Kulshreshtha, Heng-Tze Cheng, Alicia Jin, Taylor Bos, Leslie Baker, Yu Du, 2022. Lamda: Language models for dialog applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.08239 (2022). Go to Citation Google Scholar · arXiv
  49. [62][62] Anh Truong, Floraine Berthouzoz, Wilmot Li, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2016. Quickcut: An interactive tool for editing narrated video. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 497–507. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  50. [63][63] Baptist Vandersmissen, Fréderic Godin, Abhineshwar Tomar, Wesley De Neve, and Rik Van de Walle. 2014. The rise of mobile and social short-form video: an in-depth measurement study of vine. In Workshop on social multimedia and storytelling, Vol. 1198. Citeseer, 1–10. Google Scholar a [...] compared to traditional long-form videos b [...] fresh ideas amid quickly fading popularity c [...] diverse content within short cycles
  51. [64][64] Arantxa Vizcaíno-Verdú and Crystal Abidin. 2023. TeachTok: Teachers of TikTok, micro-celebrification, and fun learning communities. Teaching and Teacher Education 123 (2023), 103978. Go to Citation Crossref Google Scholar
  52. [65][65] Greg Walsh and Eric Wronsky. 2019. AI+ co-design: developing a novel computer-supported approach to inclusive design. In Conference companion publication of the 2019 on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. 408–412. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  53. [67][67] Hongcheng Wang, Ning Xu, Ramesh Raskar, and Narendra Ahuja. 2007. Videoshop: A new framework for spatio-temporal video editing in gradient domain. Graphical models 69, 1 (2007), 57–70. Go to Citation Google Scholar
  54. [68][68] Yanheng Wei, Lianghua Huang, Yanhao Zhang, Yun Zheng, and Pan Pan. 2022. An Intelligent Advertisement Short Video Production System via Multi-Modal Retrieval. In Proceedings of the 45th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 3368–3372. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  55. [69][69] Allison Woodruff, Sarah E Fox, Steven Rousso-Schindler, and Jeffrey Warshaw. 2018. A qualitative exploration of perceptions of algorithmic fairness. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–14. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  56. [72][72] Qian Yang, Alex Scuito, John Zimmerman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Aaron Steinfeld. 2018. Investigating how experienced UX designers effectively work with machine learning. In Proceedings of the 2018 designing interactive systems conference. 585–596. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] specific needs. However, recent studies b [...] capabilities and complex outputs of AI
  57. [74][74] Saelyne Yang, Changyoon Lee, Hijung Valentina Shin, and Juho Kim. 2020. Snapstream: Snapshot-based interaction in live streaming for visual art. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar
  58. [75][75] Nur Yildirim, Alex Kass, Teresa Tung, Connor Upton, Donnacha Costello, Robert Giusti, Sinem Lacin, Sara Lovic, James M O’Neill, Rudi O’Reilly Meehan, 2022. How Experienced Designers of Enterprise Applications Engage AI as a Design Material. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] (Artificial Intelligence) on creative work b [...] to augment experts’ capabilities
  59. [76][76] Nur Yildirim, Changhoon Oh, Deniz Sayar, Kayla Brand, Supritha Challa, Violet Turri, Nina Crosby Walton, Anna Elise Wong, Jodi Forlizzi, James McCann, 2023. Creating Design Resources to Scaffold the Ideation of AI Concepts. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 2326–2346. Digital Library Google Scholar a [...] (Artificial Intelligence) on creative work b [...] to augment experts’ capabilities c [...] into 40 features across various domains d [...] Leveraging the AI capabilities framework e [...] Inspired by f [...] drawing inspiration from the work of
  60. [78][78] Jamie Zigelbaum, Michael S Horn, Orit Shaer, and Robert JK Jacob. 2007. The tangible video editor: collaborative video editing with active tokens. In Proceedings of the 1st international Conference on Tangible and Embedded interaction. 43–46. Go to Citation Digital Library Google Scholar Cited By View all Teodoro SGunawan AKim SOh JKim M(2026)PRIMEdit: Probability Redistribution for Instance-Aware Multi-Object Video Editing With a New Benchmark DatasetIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence10.1109/TPAMI.2026.372223948:11(15571-15588)Online publication date: Nov-2026 https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2026.3722239 Zengin F(2026)Generative Cinema and the Transformation of Film Production Through Artificial IntelligenceIndustry Transformations of AI in Video Production10.4018/979-8-2600-1393-9.ch007(183-208)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2026 https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-2600-1393-9.ch007 Hananto B(2026)Artificial Intelligence in Video ProductionIndustry Transformations of AI in Video Production10.4018/979-8-2600-1393-9.ch003(65-96)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2026 https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-2600-1393-9.ch003 Show More Cited By Index Terms Index Terms (Premium feature) Unlocking Creator-AI Synergy: Challenges, Requirements, and Design Opportunities in AI-Powered Short-Form Video Production Human-centered computing Collaborative and social computing Empirical studies in collaborative and social computing Human computer interaction (HCI) Empirical studies in HCI Recommendations Recommendations (Premium feature) Creator-friendly Algorithms: Behaviors, Challenges, and Design Opportunities in Algorithmic Platforms CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems In many creator economy platforms, algorithms significantly impact creators’ practices and decisions about their creative expression and monetization. Emerging research suggests that the opacity of the algorithm and platform policies often distract ... Read More Dasdaq: Reimagining Dreams as Creative Assets in Human–AI Systems CHI EA '26: Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Dreams have been understood a generative source of creative insight, producing associations and narratives that extend beyond waking cognition. Recent HCI research has begun to engage this potential through systems that capture and reinterpret dream ... Read More Generative AI as a Mediator in Creator Collaboration: Challenges, Design Opportunities, and Concerns As Generative AI (GenAI) expands beyond individual workflows and becomes increasingly integrated into collaborative creative work, its potential to address the fundamental challenge of building common ground among creators with diverse expertise remains ... Read More Comments Comments (Premium feature) Information & Contributors Information Published In cover image ACM Conferences CHI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems May 2024 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, J., & Kim, H.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
ORCID
Venue
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2024-05-11
Pages
1-23
DOI
10.1145/3613904.3642476
OpenAlex
W4396832212
Cited by
30
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 16
FWCI
11.72
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Digital Media and Visual Art
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology's Impact on Media
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
information bubbles, creative output, participatory design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review