How Our AI-Assisted Qualitative Analysis Failed

4Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The authors describe how their Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI)-Assisted qualitative research project failed to produce publishable results. Based on this experience, they argue for the value of embracing and reflecting on failure in GAI-Assisted qualitative research. To frame this argument, they draw on two theories of generative failure: failing forward, which uses failures to iterate on designs to meet existing criteria, and failing sideways, which reconsiders the criteria for success. Using a fail-forward perspective, the authors describe how they might revise their research methods for data preparation, process documentation, and task delegation to create more reliable results. Then, using a fail-sideways perspective, they reexamine criteria for publishable results to reimagine the study more fundamentally.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Thominet, L., Acosta, K., Amorim, J., & Sohan, V. K. (2024). How Our AI-Assisted Qualitative Analysis Failed. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, SIGDOC 2024 (pp. 212–216). Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3641237.3691672

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free