Amanda Baughan

Good faith disagreements and healthy conflict management are essential to deliberative democracy and building strong relationships. People increasingly use computer-mediated communication during disagreements, which raises the question of how technology and design impact users’ disagreements and relationships. We conducted a mixed-methods study with 257 participants to understand how design impacts disagreements across both existing social media platforms and novel, user-generated designs. Through interviews, a survey, and storyboard evaluations, we found that users often want to discuss challenging topics online but avoid them due to fear of hurting their relationships. Further, we found that users are most excited about design interventions that empower collective group action, humanize others online, or support channel switching to more private or socially rich contexts. Our results suggest that although technology has the potential to support users during conflict, it is also rife with possibilities to do more harm than good by diluting users’ intentions, intruding, or backfiring. We introduce "interpersonal design,” which centers relationships in the design process, an essential step in supporting users in the challenging task of arguing well.

Many people have experienced mindlessly scrolling on social media. We investigated these experiences through the lens of normative dissociation: total cognitive absorption, characterized by diminished self-awareness and reduced sense of agency. To explore user experiences of normative dissociation and how design affects the likelihood of normative dissociation, we deployed Chirp, a custom Twitter client, to 43 U.S. participants. Experience sampling and interviews revealed that sometimes, becoming absorbed in normative dissociation on social media felt like a beneficial break. However, people also reported passively slipping into normative dissociation, such that they failed to absorb any content and were left feeling like they had wasted their time. We found that designed interventions–including custom lists, reading history labels, time limit dialogs, and usage statistics–reduced normative dissociation. Our findings demonstrate that interaction designs intended to capture attention likely do so by harnessing people’s natural inclination to seek normative dissociation experiences. This suggests that normative dissociation may be a more productive framing than addiction for discussing social media overuse.

Despite huge gains in performance in natural language understanding via large language models in recent years, voice assistants still often fail to meet user expectations. In this study, we conducted a mixed-methods analysis of how voice assistant failures affect users’ trust in their voice assistants. To illustrate how users have experienced these failures, we contribute a crowdsourced dataset of 199 voice assistant failures, categorized across 12 failure sources. Relying on interview and survey data, we find that certain failures, such as those due to overcapturing users’ input, derail user trust more than others. We additionally examine how failures impact users’ willingness to rely on voice assistants for future tasks. Users often stop using their voice assistants for specific tasks that result in failures for a short period of time before resuming similar usage. We demonstrate the importance of low stakes tasks, such as playing music, towards building trust after failures.

Relationships are perhaps the single greatest source of human happiness, and as part of building strong relationships, conflict and hard conversations are unavoidable. As people increasingly rely on digital communication to initiate and resolve conflicts, we examine how design can improve the experience of working through hard conversations within close relationships. We interviewed six psychotherapists and twenty-one social media users to understand both theoretical best practices for navigating conflict and users’ experiences with hard conversations online, particularly on text-based messaging platforms. We used our findings to create a temporal model of how digital design could intervene to support users and their relationships during these conversations. Specifically, we find that design can help to facilitate more mutually consensual difficult conversations, support emotional regulation during the conversation, and help facilitate pauses when necessary. We explore the tensions between balancing the needs of relationships and the individuals in them in digital design, and how to center relationships in digital design.