CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Innovative Human-Technology InteractionUsability and User Interface DesignPersona Design and Applications

Micro-narratives: A Scalable Method for Eliciting Stories of People’s Lived Experience

Open access
Skeggs, Amira, Mehta, Ashish, Yap, Valerie, Ibrahim, Seray B, Rhodes, Charla, Gross, James J., Munson, Sean A., Klasnja, Predrag +2 more·2025·Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3706598.3713999PMC PMC12265993
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Engaging with people's lived experiences is foundational for HCI research and design. This paper introduces a novel narrative elicitation method to empower people to easily articulate 'micro-narratives' emerging from their lived experiences, irrespective of their writing ability or background. Our approach aims to enable at-scale collection of rich, co-created datasets that highlight target populations' voices with minimal participant burden, while precisely addressing specific research questions. To pilot this idea, and test its feasibility, we: (i) developed an AI-powered prototype, which leverages LLM-chaining to scaffold the cognitive steps necessary for users' narrative articulation; (ii) deployed it in three mixed-methods studies involving over 380 users; and (iii) consulted with established academics as well as C-level staff at (inter)national non-profits to map out potential applications. Both qualitative and quantitative findings show the acceptability and promise of the micro-narrative method, while also identifying the ethical and safeguarding considerations necessary for any at-scale deployments.

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

Crossref · 10.1145/3706598.3713999

Cites

12 of 12 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?

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: 71

  1. [1]Abbas Noorhan, Pickard Thomas, Atwell Eric, and Walker Aisha. 2021. University student surveys using chatbots: artificial intelligence conversational agents. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 155– 169.
  2. [3]Blades Caroline A., Stritzke Werner G.K., Page Andrew C., and Brown Julia D.. 2018. The benefits and risks of asking research participants about suicide: A meta-analysis of the impact of exposure to suicide-related content. Clinical Psychology Review 64 (2018), 1– 12. 10.1016/j.cpr.2018.07.001 30014862 · DOI · Paper page
  3. [4]Boehner Kirsten, Vertesi Janet, Sengers Phoebe, and Dourish Paul. 2007. How HCI interprets the probes. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘07). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1077– 1086. 10.1145/1240624.1240789 · DOI
  4. [5]Braun Virginia and Clarke Victoria. 2019. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise and health 11, 4 (2019), 589– 597.
  5. [6]Paul-Christian Bürkner. 2017. brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of statistical software 80 (2017), 1– 28.
  6. [7]Susanne Bødker. 2015. Third-wave HCI, 10 years later—participation and sharing. interactions 22, 5 (Aug. 2015), 24– 31. 10.1145/2804405 · DOI
  7. [8]Caine Kelly. 2016. Local standards for sample size at CHI. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 981– 992.
  8. [9]Cao Jiaxun, Laabadli Hiba, Mathis Chase H, Stern Rebecca D, and Emami-Naeini Pardis. 2024. “I Deleted It After the Overturn of Roe v. Wade”: Understanding Women’s Privacy Concerns Toward Period-Tracking Apps in the Post Roe v. Wade Era. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ‘24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 813, 22 pages. 10.1145/3613904.3642042 · DOI
  9. [10]Clifford Scott, Iyengar Vijeth, Cabeza Roberto, and Sinnott-Armstrong Walter. 2015. Moral foundations vignettes: A standardized stimulus database of scenarios based on moral foundations theory. Behavior research methods 47, 4 (2015), 1178– 1198. 25582811 PMC4780680
  10. [11]Crabtree A, Hemmings T, Rodden T, Cheverst K, Clarke K, Dewsbury G, Hughes J, and Rouncefield M. 2004. Designing with care: Adapting cultural probes to inform design in sensitive settings. In Proceedings of the 2004 Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (OZCHI ‘04). Ergonomics Society of Australia, Brisbane, Australia, 4– 13.
  11. [12]Craig Peter, Dieppe Paul, Macintyre Sally, Mitchie Susan, Nazareth Irwin, and Petticrew Mark. 2008. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. Bmj 337, 7676 (2008), 979– 983. 10.1136/bmj.a1655 PMC2769032 18824488 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [13]Swain Vedant Das, Gao Lan, Mondal Abhirup, Abowd Gregory D., and De Choudhury Munmun. 2024. Sensible and Sensitive AI for Worker Wellbeing: Factors that Inform Adoption and Resistance for Information Workers. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ‘24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 104, 30 pages. 10.1145/3613904.3642716 · DOI
  13. [15]Dercon Quentin, Mehrhof Sara Z., Sandhu Timothy R., Hitchcock Caitlin, Lawson Rebecca P., Pizzagalli Diego A., Dalgleish Tim, and Nord Camilla L.. 2024. A core component of psychological therapy causes adaptive changes in computational learning mechanisms. Psychological Medicine 54, 2 (2024), 327– 337. 10.1017/S0033291723001587 37288530 PMC11949617 · DOI
  14. [16]Fede Giulia Di, Rocchesso Davide, Dow Steven P, and Andolina Salvatore. 2022. The idea machine: LLM-based expansion, rewriting, combination, and suggestion of ideas. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Creativity and Cognition. 623– 627.
  15. [17]Evans Spencer C, Roberts Michael C, Keeley Jared W, Blossom Jennifer B, Amaro Christina M, Garcia Andrea M, Stough Cathleen Odar, Canter Kimberly S, Robles Rebeca, and Reed Geoffrey M. 2015. Vignette methodologies for studying clinicians’ decision-making: Validity, utility, and application in ICD-11 field studies. International journal of clinical and health psychology 15, 2 (2015), 160– 170. 30487833 PMC6224682
  16. [18]Gabriel Iason, Manzini Arianna, Keeling Geoff, Hendricks Lisa Anne, Rieser Verena, Iqbal Hasan, Tomašev Nenad, Ktena Ira, Kenton Zachary, Rodriguez Mikel, El-Sayed Seliem, Brown Sasha, Akbulut Canfer, Trask Andrew, Hughes Edward, Bergman A. Stevie, Shelby Renee, Marchal Nahema, Griffin Conor, Juan Mateos-Garcia Laura Weidinger, Street Winnie, Lange Benjamin, Ingerman Alex, Lentz Alison, Enger Reed, Barakat Andrew, Krakovna Victoria, John Oliver Siy Zeb Kurth-Nelson, Amanda McCroskery Vijay Bolina, Law Harry, Shanahan Murray, Alberts Lize, Balle Borja, Sarah de Haas Yetunde Ibitoye, Dafoe Allan, Goldberg Beth, Krier Sébastien, Reese Alexander, Witherspoon Sims, Hawkins Will, Rauh Maribeth, Wallace Don, Franklin Matija, Goldstein Josh A., Lehman Joel, Klenk Michael, Vallor Shannon, Biles Courtney, Morris Meredith Ringel, King Helen, Arcas Blaise Agüera y, Isaac William, and Manyika James. 2024. The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants. arXiv:2404.16244 [cs.CY] https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.16244 · arXiv
  17. [19]Garg Radhika. 2021. Engaging Parents and Teens in an Asynchronous, Remote, Community-Based Method for Understanding the Future of Voice Technology. In Interaction Design and Children. ACM, Athens Greece, 224– 235. 10.1145/3459990.3460732 · DOI
  18. [20]Gaver Bill, Dunne Tony, and Pacenti Elena. 1999. Design: Cultural Probes. interactions 6, 1 (Jan. 1999), 21– 29. 10.1145/291224.291235 · DOI
  19. [21]Gaver William W., Boucher Andrew, Pennington Sarah, and Walker Brendan. 2004. Cultural Probes and the Value of Uncertainty. Interactions 11, 5 (Sept. 2004), 53– 56. 10.1145/1015530.1015555 · DOI
  20. [22]Haigh Carol and Hardy Pip. 2011. Tell me a story—a conceptual exploration of storytelling in healthcare education. Nurse education today 31, 4 (2011), 408– 411. 20810195
  21. [23]Henderson Claire, Robinson Emily, Evans-Lacko Sara, and Thornicroft Graham. 2017. Relationships between anti-stigma programme awareness, disclosure comfort and intended help-seeking regarding a mental health problem. The British Journal of Psychiatry 211, 5 (2017), 316– 322. 28935661 PMC5663972
  22. [24]Hobson Zoë, Yesberg Julia A, Bradford Ben, and Jackson Jonathan. 2021. Artificial fairness? Trust in algorithmic police decision-making. Journal of experimental criminology (2021), 1– 25. PMC8435155 34539294
  23. [26]Hourcade Juan Pablo. 2015. Child-Computer Interaction (eds ed.). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform; First Edition edition, online.
  24. [27]Hutchinson Hilary, Mackay Wendy, Westerlund Bo, Bederson Benjamin B., Druin Allison, Plaisant Catherine, Beaudouin-Lafon Michel, Conversy Stéphane, Evans Helen, Hansen Heiko, Roussel Nicolas, and Eiderbäck Björn. 2003. Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Ft. Lauderdale Florida USA, 17– 24. 10.1145/642611.642616 · DOI · Paper page
  25. [28]Ibrahim Seray B, Antle Alissa N., Kientz Julie A., Pullin Graham, and Slovak Petr. 2024. A Systematic Review of the Probes Method in Research with Children and Families. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference (Delft, Netherlands) (IDC ‘24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 157– 172. 10.1145/3628516.3655814 · DOI
  26. [29]Ito Mizuko. 2013. Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. The MIT press.
  27. [30]Keles Betul, Grealish Annmarie, and Leamy Mary. 2024. The beauty and the beast of social media: an interpretative phenomenological analysis of the impact of adolescents’ social media experiences on their mental health during the Covid-19 pandemic. Current Psychology 43, 1 (2024), 96– 112. PMC9860222 36713619
  28. [31]Kern Christoph, Gerdon Frederic, Bach Ruben L, Keusch Florian, and Kreuter Frauke. 2022. Humans versus machines: Who is perceived to decide fairer? Experimental evidence on attitudes toward automated decision-making. Patterns 3, 10 (2022). PMC9583126 36277823
  29. [32]Kim Soomin, Lee Joonhwan, and Gweon Gahgene. 2019. Comparing data from chatbot and web surveys: Effects of platform and conversational style on survey response quality. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1– 12.
  30. [33]Kim Taewan, Bae Seolyeong, Kim Hyun Ah, Lee Su-Woo, Hong Hwajung, Yang Chanmo, and Kim Young-Ho. 2024. MindfulDiary: Harnessing Large Language Model to Support Psychiatric Patients’ Journaling. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2024), 1– 20. 10.1145/3613904.3642937 arXiv:2310.05231 · DOI
  31. [34]Laban Philippe, Vig Jesse, Hearst Marti A, Xiong Caiming, and Wu Chien-Sheng. 2023. Beyond the chat: Executable and verifiable text-editing with llms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.15337 (2023). · arXiv
  32. [35]Lahti H, Kulmala M, Lyyra N, Mietola V, and Paakkari L. 2024. Problematic situations related to social media use and competencies to prevent them: results of a Delphi study. Scientific Reports 14, 1 (2024), 5275. 38438460 PMC10912411
  33. [38]Lawrence Hannah R, Schneider Renee A, Rubin Susan B, Matarić Maja J, McDuff Daniel J, and Bell Megan Jones. 2024. The opportunities and risks of large language models in mental health. JMIR Mental Health 11, 1 (2024), e59479. 39105570 PMC11301767
  34. [39]Lawrence Hannah R, Schneider Renee A, Rubin Susan B, Matarić Maja J, McDuff Daniel J, and Bell Megan Jones. 2024. The Opportunities and Risks of Large Language Models in Mental Health. JMIR Mental Health 11 (2024), e59479. 10.2196/59479 arXiv:2403.14814 39105570 PMC11301767 · DOI · Paper page
  35. [41]Livingstone Sonia and Blum-Ross Alicia. 2020. Parenting for a digital future: How hopes and fears about technology shape children’s lives. Oxford University Press, USA.
  36. [42]Lloyd-Richardson Elizabeth E, Lewis Stephen P, Whitlock Janis L, Rodham Karen, and Schatten Heather T. 2015. Research with adolescents who engage in non-suicidal self-injury: ethical considerations and challenges. Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health 9 (2015), 1– 14. 26417391 PMC4584461
  37. [44]MacLeod Haley, Jelen Ben, Prabhakar Annu, Oehlberg Lora, Siek Katie A, and Connelly Kay. 2016. Lessons learned from conducting group-based research on facebook. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 804– 815.
  38. [45]Maestre Juan F., MacLeod Haley, Connelly Ciabhan L., Dunbar Julia C., Beck Jordan, Siek Katie A., and Shih Patrick C.. 2018. Defining Through Expansion: Conducting Asynchronous Remote Communities (ARC) Research with Stigmatized Groups. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1– 13. 10.1145/3173574.3174131 · DOI
  39. [46]Mahmud Bahar, Hong Guan, and Fong Bernard. 2023. A Study of Human–AI Symbiosis for Creative Work: Recent Developments and Future Directions in Deep Learning. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 20, 2, Article 47 (sep 2023), 21 pages. 10.1145/3542698 · DOI
  40. [47]Mattelmäki Tuuli and Battarbee Katja. 2002. Empathy Probes. In PDC 02 Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference. CPSR, Malmo, Sweden, 266– 271. https://ojs.ruc.dk/index.php/pdc/article/view/265
  41. [49]Miller Angie L and Dumford Amber D. 2014. Open-Ended Survey Questions: Item Nonresponse Nightmare or Qualitative Data Dream? Survey Practice 7, 5 (2014), 1– 11. 10.29115/sp-2014-002426451335 · DOI
  42. [50]Mohr David C., Schueller Stephen M., Riley William T., Brown C. Hendricks, Cuijpers Pim, Duan Naihua, Kwasny Mary J., Stiles-Shields Colleen, and Cheung Ken. 2015. Trials of intervention principles: Evaluation methods for evolving behavioral intervention technologies. Journal of Medical Internet Research 17, 7 (2015). 10.2196/jmir.4391 PMC4526981 26155878 · DOI · Paper page
  43. [51]Morton Emma, Barnes Steven J, and Michalak Erin E. 2020. Participatory digital health research: A new paradigm for mHealth tool development. General Hospital Psychiatry 66 (2020), 67– 69. 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2020.07.005 32702489 PMC7354771 · DOI
  44. [52]Pennebaker James W., Mehl Matthias R., and Niederhoffer Kate G.. 2003. Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves. Annual Review of Psychology 54, Volume 54, 2003 (2003), 547– 577. 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041 12185209 · DOI · Paper page
  45. [53]Poulou Maria. 2001. The role of vignettes in the research of emotional and behavioural difficulties. Emotional and behavioural difficulties 6, 1 (2001), 50– 62.
  46. [55]Qin Hua Xuan, Jin Shan, Gao Ze, Fan Mingming, and Hui Pan. 2024. CharacterMeet: Supporting Creative Writers’ Entire Story Character Construction Processes Through Conversation with LLM-Powered Chatbot Avatars. Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2024), 1– 19. 10.1145/3613904.3642105 · DOI · Paper page
  47. [56]Randhawa Amie, Wood Grace, Michail Maria, Pallan Miranda, Patterson Paul, and Goodyear Victoria. 2024. Safeguarding in adolescent mental health research navigating dilemmas and developing procedures. BMJ open 14, 2 (2024), e076700. PMC10910574 38423772
  48. [57]Rennick-Egglestone Stefan, Morgan Kate, Llewellyn-Beardsley Joy, Ramsay Amy, Rose McGranahan Steve Gillard, Hui Ada, Ng Fiona, Schneider Justine, Booth Susie, 2019. Mental health recovery narratives and their impact on recipients: systematic review and narrative synthesis. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry 64, 10 (2019), 669– 679. 31046432 PMC6783672
  49. [58]Rhim Jungwook, Kwak Minji, Gong Yeaeun, and Gweon Gahgene. 2022. Application of humanization to survey chatbots: Change in chatbot perception, interaction experience, and survey data quality. Computers in Human Behavior 126 (2022), 107034.
  50. [59]Rogers Yvonne and Marshall Paul. 2017. Research in the Wild. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics 10, 3 (April 2017), i– 97. 10.2200/S00764ED1V01Y201703HCI037 · DOI
  51. [60]Sampson Helen and Johannessen Idar Alfred. 2020. Turning on the tap: the benefits of using ‘real-life’ vignettes in qualitative research interviews. Qualitative Research 20, 1 (2020), 56– 72. 10.1177/1468794118816618 · DOI
  52. [62]Seo Woosuk, Yang Chanmo, and Kim Young-Ho. 2023. ChaCha: Leveraging Large Language Models to Prompt Children to Share Their Emotions about Personal Events. arXiv (2023). 10.1145/3613904.3642152 arXiv:2309.12244 · DOI
  53. [63]Sharkey Siobhan, Jones Ray, Smithson Janet, Hewis Elaine, Emmens Tobit, Ford Tamsin, and Owens Christabel. 2011. Ethical practice in internet research involving vulnerable people: lessons from a self-harm discussion forum study (SharpTalk). Journal of medical ethics 37, 12 (2011), 752– 758. 21947802
  54. [65]Shin Joongi, Hedderich Michael A., Rey Bartłomiej Jakub, Lucero Andrés, and Oulasvirta Antti. 2024. Understanding Human-AI Workflows for Generating Personas. Designing Interactive Systems Conference (2024), 757– 781. 10.1145/3643834.3660729 · DOI
  55. [66]Simonsen Jesper and Robertson Toni (Eds.). 2013. Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge, London. OCLC: 818827037.
  56. [67]Slovak Petr and Munson Sean A.. 2024. HCI Contributions in Mental Health: A Modular Framework to Guide Psychosocial Intervention Design. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ‘24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 692, 21 pages. 10.1145/3613904.3642624 PMC11105670 38770195 · DOI
  57. [68]Thieme Anja, Belgrave Danielle, and Doherty Gavin. 2020. Machine learning in mental health: A systematic review of the HCI literature to support the development of effective and implementable ML systems. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 27, 5 (2020), 1– 53.
  58. [69]Törrönen Jukka. 2002. Semiotic theory on qualitative interviewing using stimulus texts. Qualitative research 2, 3 (2002), 343– 362.
  59. [70]Tremblay Dominique, Turcotte Annie, Touati Nassera, Poder Thomas G, Kilpatrick Kelley, Bilodeau Karine, Roy Mathieu, Richard Patrick O, Lessard Sylvie, and Giordano Émilie. 2022. Development and use of research vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals: A scoping review. BMJ open 12, 1 (2022), e057095. PMC8804653 35105654
  60. [71]Tremblay Dominique, Turcotte Annie, Touati Nassera, Poder Thomas G, Kilpatrick Kelley, Bilodeau Karine, Roy Mathieu, Richard Patrick O, Lessard Sylvie, and Giordano Émilie. 2022. Development and use of research vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals: a scoping review. BMJ Open 12, 1 (2022), e057095. 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057095 PMC8804653 35105654 · DOI
  61. [73]Villa Steeven, Niess Jasmin, Nakao Takuro, Lazar Jonathan, Schmidt Albrecht, and Machulla Tonja-Katrin. 2023. Understanding Perception of Human Augmentation: A Mixed-Method Study. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ‘23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 65, 16 pages. 10.1145/3544548.3581485 · DOI
  62. [74]Von Terzi Pia and Diefenbach Sarah. 2023. The Attendant Perspective: Present Others in Public Technology Interactions. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ‘23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 502, 18 pages. 10.1145/3544548.3581231 · DOI
  63. [75]Wankhade Mayur, Sekhara Rao Annavarapu Chandra, and Kulkarni Chaitanya. 2022. A survey on sentiment analysis methods, applications, and challenges. Artificial Intelligence Review 55, 7 (2022), 5731– 5780.
  64. [77]Weinstein Emily and James Carrie. 2022. Behind their screens: What teens are facing (and adults are missing). MIT Press.
  65. [78]White Jules, Fu Quchen, Hays Sam, Sandborn Michael, Olea Carlos, Gilbert Henry, Elnashar Ashraf, Spencer-Smith Jesse, and Schmidt Douglas C. 2023. A prompt pattern catalog to enhance prompt engineering with chatgpt. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11382 (2023). · arXiv
  66. [80]Wu Tongshuang, Terry Michael, and Cai Carrie Jun. 2022. AI Chains: Transparent and Controllable Human-AI Interaction by Chaining Large Language Model Prompts. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2022), 1– 22. 10.1145/3491102.3517582 arXiv:2110.01691 · DOI
  67. [81]Xiao Ziang, Zhou Michelle X., Liao Q. Vera, Mark Gloria, Chi Changyan, Chen Wenxi, and Yang Huahai. 2020. Tell Me About Yourself: Using an AI-powered Chatbot to Conduct Conversational Surveys with Open-ended Questions. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 27, 3 (2020), 1– 37. 10.1145/3381804 arXiv:1905.10700 · DOI
  68. [82]Yardley Lucy, Morrison Leanne, Bradbury Katherine, and Muller Ingrid. 2015. The person-based approach to intervention development: Application to digital health-related behavior change interventions. Journal of Medical Internet Research 17, 1 (2015), e30. 10.2196/jmir.4055 25639757 PMC4327440 · DOI · Paper page
  69. [83]Yu H and McGuinness Stephen. 2024. An experimental study of integrating fine-tuned LLMs and prompts for enhancing mental health support chatbot system. Journal of Medical Artificial Intelligence (2024), 1– 16.
  70. [84]Zamfirescu-Pereira JD, Wei Heather, Xiao Amy, Gu Kitty, Jung Grace, Lee Matthew G, Hartmann Bjoern, and Yang Qian. 2023. Herding AI Cats: Lessons from Designing a Chatbot by Prompting GPT-3. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (2023), 2206– 2220. 10.1145/3563657.3596138 · DOI
  71. [86]Çerçi Sena, Cecchinato Marta E., and Vines John. 2021. How Design Researchers Interpret Probes: Understanding the Critical Intentions of a Designerly Approach to Research. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1– 15. 10.1145/3411764.3445328 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Skeggs, A., Mehta, A., Yap, V., Ibrahim, S. B., Rhodes, C., Gross, J. J., Munson, S. A., Klasnja, P., Orben, A., & Slovak, P.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Department of Informatics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-04-25
Volume
2025
Pages
1-20
DOI
10.1145/3706598.3713999
PMC
PMC12265993
OpenAlex
W4409750046
Cited by
14
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 3
FWCI
14.20
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
UK Research and Innovation (MR/T041897/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Persona Design and Applications
Keywords
micro-narratives, narrative elicitation, lived experience, large language models, scalability, participant burden, nonprofit organizations, research ethics, safeguarding

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