//
sign in
Profile
by @danabra.mov
Profile
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
Profile
by @jimpick.com
AviHandle
by @danabra.mov
AviHandle
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
AviHandle
by @katherine.computer
EventsList
by @katherine.computer
ProfileHeader
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileHeader
by @danabra.mov
ProfileMedia
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePlays
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @danabra.mov
ProfilePosts
by @dansshadow.bsky.social
ProfileReplies
by @danabra.mov
Record
by @atsui.org
Skircle
by @danabra.mov
StreamPlacePlaylist
by @katherine.computer
+ new component
Profile
Loading...
PhD student @uwcse.bsky.social ⁕ I work in HCI and NLP :) » advaitmb.com
Advait Bhat
Loading...
Writers with a Positive AI ended up writing about different topics than writers with a Critical AI, and both wrote on a narrower range of topics than writers working alone.
2mo
Advait Bhat
This is algorithmic agenda-setting at the moment of ideation. As Bernard Cohen wrote of the press in 1963: it may not tell people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling them what to think about. AI writing assistants may now do the same for writers.
Writers accepted or rejected suggestions based on whether they agreed with them, regardless of if they had come up with the ideas themselves. They felt in control as they could always reject or edit, but they didn't choose which ideas got surfaced in the first place.
This paper would not have been possible without the collaboration and guidance of @mjakesch.bsky.social, @mariannealq.bsky.social and @informor.bsky.social. The paper is now available in open access! #chi2026 dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/...