Reflexis: Supporting Reflexivity and Rigor in Collaborative Qualitative Analysis through Design for Deliberation

Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) is a critical method for generating deep interpretive insights. Yet its core tenets, including researcher reflexivity, tangible analytical evolution, and productive disagreement, are often poorly supported by software tools that prioritize speed and consensus over interpretive depth. To address this gap, we introduce Reflexis, a collaborative workspace that centers these practices. It supports reflexivity by integrating in-situ reflection prompts, makes code evolution transparent and tangible, and scaffolds collaborative interpretation by turning differences into productive, positionality-aware dialogue. Results from our paired-analyst study (N=12) indicate that Reflexis encouraged participants toward more granular reflection and reframed disagreements as productive conversations. The evaluation also surfaced key design tensions, including a desire for higher-level, networked memos and more user control over the timing of proactive alerts. Reflexis contributes a design framework for tools that prioritize rigor and transparency to support deep, collaborative interpretation in an age of automation.

TreeWriter: AI-Assisted Hierarchical Planning and Writing for Long-Form Documents

Long documents pose many challenges to current intelligent writing systems. These include maintaining consistency across sections, sustaining efficient planning and writing as documents become more complex, and effectively providing and integrating AI assistance to the user. Existing AI co-writing tools offer either inline suggestions or limited structured planning, but rarely support the entire writing process that begins with high-level ideas and ends with polished prose, in which many layers of planning and outlining are needed. Here, we introduce TreeWriter, a hierarchical writing system that represents documents as trees and integrates contextual AI support. TreeWriter allows authors to create, save, and refine document outlines at multiple levels, facilitating drafting, understanding, and iterative editing of long documents. A built-in AI agent can dynamically load relevant content, navigate the document hierarchy, and provide context-aware editing suggestions. A within-subject study (N=12) comparing TreeWriter with Google Docs + Gemini on long-document editing and creative writing tasks shows that TreeWriter improves idea exploration/development, AI helpfulness, and perceived authorial control. A two-month field deployment (N=8) further demonstrated that hierarchical organization supports collaborative writing. Our findings highlight the potential of hierarchical, tree-structured editors with integrated AI support and provide design guidelines for future AI-assisted writing tools that balance automation with user agency.

Improving Student-AI Interaction Through Pedagogical Prompting: An Example in Computer Science Education

With the proliferation of large language model (LLM) applications since 2022, their use in education has sparked both excitement and concern. Recent studies consistently highlight students' (mis)use of LLMs can hinder learning outcomes. This work aims to teach students how to effectively prompt LLMs to improve their learning. We first proposed pedagogical prompting, a theoretically-grounded new concept to elicit learning-oriented responses from LLMs. To move from concept design to a proof-of-concept learning intervention in real educational settings, we selected early undergraduate CS education (CS1/CS2) as the example context. We began with a formative survey study with instructors (N=36) teaching early-stage undergraduate-level CS courses to inform the instructional design based on classroom needs. Based on their insights, we designed and developed a learning intervention through an interactive system with scenario-based instruction to train pedagogical prompting skills. Finally, we evaluated its instructional effectiveness through a user study with CS novice students (N=22) using pre/post-tests. Through mixed methods analyses, our results indicate significant improvements in learners' LLM-based pedagogical help-seeking skills, along with positive attitudes toward the system and increased willingness to use pedagogical prompts in the future. Our contributions include (1) a theoretical framework of pedagogical prompting; (2) empirical insights into current instructor attitudes toward pedagogical prompting; and (3) a learning intervention design with an interactive learning tool and scenario-based instruction leading to promising results on teaching LLM-based help-seeking. Our approach is scalable for broader implementation in classrooms and has the potential to be integrated into tools like ChatGPT as an on-boarding experience to encourage learning-oriented use of generative AI.

ScholarMate: A Mixed-Initiative Tool for Qualitative Knowledge Work and Information Sensemaking

Synthesizing knowledge from large document collections is a critical yet increasingly complex aspect of qualitative research and knowledge work. While AI offers automation potential, effectively integrating it into human-centric sensemaking workflows remains challenging. We present ScholarMate, an interactive system designed to augment qualitative analysis by unifying AI assistance with human oversight. ScholarMate enables researchers to dynamically arrange and interact with text snippets on a non-linear canvas, leveraging AI for theme suggestions, multi-level summarization, and contextual naming, while ensuring transparency through traceability to source documents. Initial pilot studies indicated that users value this mixed-initiative approach, finding the balance between AI suggestions and direct manipulation crucial for maintaining interpretability and trust. We further demonstrate the system's capability through a case study analyzing 24 papers. By balancing automation with human control, ScholarMate enhances efficiency and supports interpretability, offering a valuable approach for productive human-AI collaboration in demanding sensemaking tasks common in knowledge work.

The Design Space of Recent AI-assisted Research Tools for Ideation, Sensemaking, and Scientific Creativity

Generative AI (GenAI) tools are radically expanding the scope and capability of automation in knowledge work such as academic research. AI-assisted research tools show promise for augmenting human cognition and streamlining research processes, but could potentially increase automation bias and stifle critical thinking. We surveyed the past three years of publications from leading HCI venues. We closely examined 11 AI-assisted research tools, five employing traditional AI approaches and six integrating GenAI, to explore how these systems envision novel capabilities and design spaces. We consolidate four design recommendations that inform cognitive engagement when working with an AI research tool: Providing user agency and control; enabling divergent and convergent thinking; supporting adaptability and flexibility; and ensuring transparency and accuracy. We discuss how these ideas mark a shift in AI-assisted research tools from mimicking a researcher's established workflows to generative co-creation with the researcher and the opportunities this shift affords the research community.

CodeAid: Evaluating a Classroom Deployment of an LLM-based Programming Assistant that Balances Student and Educator Needs

Timely, personalized feedback is essential for students learning programming, especially as class sizes expand. LLM-based tools like ChatGPT offer instant support, but reveal direct answers with code, which may hinder deep conceptual engagement. We developed CodeAid, an LLM-based programming assistant delivering helpful, technically correct responses, without revealing code solutions. For example, CodeAid can answer conceptual questions, generate pseudo-code with line-by-line explanations, and annotate student's incorrect code with fix suggestions. We deployed CodeAid in a programming class of 700 students for a 12-week semester. A thematic analysis of 8,000 usages of CodeAid was performed, further enriched by weekly surveys, and 22 student interviews. We then interviewed eight programming educators to gain further insights on CodeAid. Findings revealed students primarily used CodeAid for conceptual understanding and debugging, although a minority tried to obtain direct code. Educators appreciated CodeAid's educational approach, and expressed concerns about occasional incorrect feedback and students defaulting to ChatGPT.