Qualitative inductive methods are widely used in CSCW and HCI research for their ability to generatively discover deep and contextualized insights, but these inherently manual and human-resource-intensive processes are often infeasible for analyzing large corpora. Researchers have been increasingly interested in ways to apply qualitative methods to "big" data problems, hoping to achieve more generalizable results from larger amounts of data while preserving the depth and richness of qualitative methods. In this paper, we describe a study of qualitative researchers' work practices and their challenges, with an eye towards whether this is an appropriate domain for human-AI collaboration and what successful collaborations might entail. Our findings characterize participants' diverse methodological practices and nuanced collaboration dynamics, and identify areas where they might benefit from AI-based tools. While participants highlight the messiness and uncertainty of qualitative inductive analysis, they still want full agency over the process and believe that AI should not interfere. Our study provides a deep investigation of task delegability in human-AI collaboration in the context of qualitative analysis, and offers directions for the design of AI assistance that honor serendipity, human agency, and ambiguity.
翻译:CSCW 和 HCI 研究中广泛使用定性导引方法,以了解它们能否从基因上发现深层次和背景的洞察力,但这些内在的人工和人力资源密集型过程往往无法用于分析大型公司。 研究人员对如何应用定性方法解决“大”数据问题越来越感兴趣,希望从大量数据中取得更普遍的成果,同时保持质量方法的深度和丰富性。本文描述了对研究人员定性工作实践及其挑战的研究,并着眼于这是否是人类-AI合作的适当领域以及成功合作可能涉及哪些方面。我们的调查结果说明了参与者的多种方法做法和细微合作动态,并确定了他们可能从基于AI的工具中受益的领域。虽然与会者强调了定性感化分析的混乱性和不确定性,但他们仍然希望在这一过程中有完全的代理,并认为AI不应干预。我们的研究对定性分析中人类-AI合作中的可减损性任务进行了深入调查,并为设计具有荣誉性的AI援助提供了方向,以维护人的机率、机构以及模糊性。