Shaping Human-AI Collaboration: Varied Scaffolding Levels in Co-writing with Language Models
Reviewed by Pithpith:DY5COLS4open to challenge →
read the original abstract
Advances in language modeling have paved the way for novel human-AI co-writing experiences. This paper explores how varying levels of scaffolding from large language models (LLMs) shape the co-writing process. Employing a within-subjects field experiment with a Latin square design, we asked participants (N=131) to respond to argumentative writing prompts under three randomly sequenced conditions: no AI assistance (control), next-sentence suggestions (low scaffolding), and next-paragraph suggestions (high scaffolding). Our findings reveal a U-shaped impact of scaffolding on writing quality and productivity (words/time). While low scaffolding did not significantly improve writing quality or productivity, high scaffolding led to significant improvements, especially benefiting non-regular writers and less tech-savvy users. No significant cognitive burden was observed while using the scaffolded writing tools, but a moderate decrease in text ownership and satisfaction was noted. Our results have broad implications for the design of AI-powered writing tools, including the need for personalized scaffolding mechanisms.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Narrix: Remixing Narrative Strategies from Examples for Story Writing
Narrix helps novices identify and reuse narrative strategies from examples through visualization and strategy-steered generation, improving retention, confidence, and adaptation over chat interfaces in a 12-person study.
-
Nonslop: A Gamified Experiment in Human-AI Collaborative Writing
A gamified experiment with 74 participants investigates when humans accept or reject AI-generated word suggestions during writing under conditions designed to discourage AI use.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.