让AI学会说不，激发创作者反思人机协作平衡
Beyond Compliance: How AI Could Help Creative Writers by Refusing Them
- 设计AI主动拒绝合理请求，制造必要摩擦以促进反思
- 不同写作阶段对拒绝反应差异大，依赖情境与认知状态
- 适合关注创作过程、避免过度依赖AI的研究者与作者
主流创意辅助设计强调顺从的AI以实现无缝写作交互，但过度依赖AI引发担忧，亟需设计能促进对人机资源平衡使用的反思。理论上，有意的AI非合规性（如拒绝请求）可通过强于其他可绕过的解决方案的摩擦感引入反思。实践中，拒绝内容与语言特征导致复杂反应。然而，现有研究极少关注除强制性伦理/技术约束外的细微差别，也未将拒绝转化为对普通请求的策略性摩擦。本文通过22位创意写作者的定性研究，探索其在构思、翻译、审阅等写作阶段对常见请求被拒绝的反应。结果表明，反思潜力取决于情境（如收敛/发散思维阶段）、认知（如领域信念）和关系（如AI角色）维度上的异质性偏好契合度。研究讨论了对创意支持设计的启示，以及更广泛议题（如AI成瘾）和具摩擦感/非无缝的AI设计（如整合多级合规性）。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Mainstream creativity support design prioritizes compliant AI for seamless writing interactions, but concerns over inappropriate AI reliance highlight the need for designs fostering reflection on balanced AI and non-AI resource use. Theoretically, intentional AI non-compliance, refusals (saying ``no'' to requests), could introduce such reflection through friction stronger than other bypass-able solutions. Practically, refusal content/language characteristics lead to nuanced reactions. However, little research empirically focuses on nuances beyond mandatory ethical/technical constraints, on turning refusals into strategic friction for `innocuous' requests. We address this through a qualitative study with 22 creative writers, exploring reactions to refusals to common requests across writing stages (planning, translating, reviewing). Findings suggest that reflective potential depends on heterogeneous preference alignment along situational (e.g., convergent/divergent thinking phases), cognitive (e.g., domain beliefs), and relational (e.g., AI roles) dimensions. We discuss implications for creativity support, broader issues (e.g., AI addiction), and frictional/seamful AI design (e.g., integrating different compliance levels).
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。