The Social Cost of an AI Teammate: How an Artificial Teammate Reshapes Human-Human Communication in Small-Team Decision-Making

Conversational AI is increasingly positioned as a teammate rather than a tool, yet we know little about how its presence reshapes communication among the humans on the team. We examined sociocognitive communication dynamics in team decision-making using Group Communication Analysis (GCA), team surveys, and lexical analyses of team discourse. Teams completed a high-stakes moral-dilemma decision task in a randomized controlled study: 16 teams of two students plus an AI teammate, and 17 all-human teams of three. Across six GCA dimensions and survey outcomes, we find that the AI teammate was the single most talkative and self-cohesive member of every treatment team, yet its contributions carried the least new information and the lowest density. The presence of AI also reshaped communication amongst humans. In AI-human teams, human teammates showed lower responsivity and social impact toward one another and reported lower levels of belonging and status. Greater AI dominance in the conversation was associated with students feeling less valued as team members. Additionally, this social cost is immediate and present at baseline; it does not emerge over the course of the conversation. Drawing on these results, we discuss a research agenda extending to voice-based and longitudinal settings.

A database to support the evaluation of gender biases in GPT-4o output

The widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs) involves ethical risks for users and societies. A prominent ethical risk of LLMs is the generation of unfair language output that reinforces or exacerbates harm for members of disadvantaged social groups through gender biases (Weidinger et al., 2022; Bender et al., 2021; Kotek et al., 2023). Hence, the evaluation of the fairness of LLM outputs with respect to such biases is a topic of rising interest. To advance research in this field, promote discourse on suitable normative bases and evaluation methodologies, and enhance the reproducibility of related studies, we propose a novel approach to database construction. This approach enables the assessment of gender-related biases in LLM-generated language beyond merely evaluating their degree of neutralization.