智能家电AI的期待管理，需平衡权利与文化仪式
From Rights to Rites: Expectations Management in Smart-Home AI
- 通过访谈33位从业者构建期望管理模型
- 揭示四类设计矛盾并提出五阶段实践手册
- 适合关注AI伦理与人机交互的开发者
家用语音助手与智能家居设备日益融入日常，但其伦理问题常被忽视或交由合规团队处理。为探究智能家庭AI期望如何被建构与管理，我们对亚马逊Alexa、微软Azure IoT和谷歌Nest平台的33名设计师、开发者及研究人员进行了半结构化访谈。基于建构主义扎根理论，提出期望管理（EM）模型：该模型强调从业者在组织权利与文化情境仪式之间动态平衡，以塑造、校准和修复用户期望。研究发现EM区别于期望确认理论与信任校准理论，在于凸显道德判断、情境化行动与跨文化差异。分析提炼出四类核心设计张力：自动化与自主权、帮助性与侵入性、个性化与可预测性、透明性与模糊性，并进一步形成五阶段的EM设计行动手册，以支持道德审慎。论文讨论了对负责任智能家庭设计的意义，并为以人为本的AI提供指导。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Domestic voice assistants and smart-home devices are increasingly embedded in everyday routines, yet their ethics are often treated as an afterthought or delegated to compliance teams. To explore how expectations about smart-home AI are constructed and managed, we conducted 33 semi-structured interviews with designers, developers, and researchers from major smart-home platforms (Amazon Alexa, Microsoft Azure IoT, and Google Nest). Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we develop Expectations Management (EM): a culturally embedded model describing how practitioners shape, calibrate, and repair expectations by balancing organisational rights with culturally situated rites. We show that EM differs from expectation-confirmation theory and trust-calibration by foregrounding moral judgement, situated action, and cross-cultural variation. Our analysis reveals four recurring design tensions: automation vs. autonomy, helpfulness vs. intrusiveness, personalisation vs. predictability, and transparency vs. obscurity and distils them into a five-phase EM Design Playbook that supports moral prudence. We discuss implications for responsible smart-home design and offer guidance for human-centred AI.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。