Beyond the Monolithic Interface: A Research Agenda for Plural Conversational AI

arXiv:2610.12878v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The current paradigm of artificial intelligence (AI) design elevates conversational chatbot interfaces, making them the default mode through which hundreds of millions of people interact with AI systems globally. This narrative review identifies three related harms produced by the single-voice chatbot interface, drawing on insights from literature in cognitive science, political studies, AI alignment, game design and human computer interaction. Firstly, cognitive offloading of user thinking, secondly, ideological narrowing of user beliefs, and thirdly, epistemic compression of cultural and value diversity. We then propose multi-persona interfaces, in which multiple personas are presented to the user simultaneously, as a cost-effective intervention that addresses all three harms at once. We ground this intervention in traditions the AI literature has largely overlooked, drawing on techniques from game design and participatory simulation, including the magic circle, role differentiation, and persona embodiment. We propose a taxonomy for the future design of multi-persona interfaces, and call for a research agenda that closes the gap between technical pluralistic alignment methods and empirical studies of human-AI interactions with pluralistic interfaces.

The paper identifies potential harms of current AI interfaces and proposes a solution, but evidence is based on a narrative review and the proposed solution is speculative.

This is a conceptual narrative review proposing a research agenda, not an empirical study. It identifies plausible but unverified harms of chatbot interfaces and proposes an untested design intervention. The implication is mildly concerning but highly speculative with no primary evidence presented.

The article identifies significant harms arising from current monolithic AI interfaces, specifically cognitive offloading, ideological narrowing, and epistemic compression. It proposes a novel solution through multi-persona interfaces. The article is a research agenda, so the harms are potential if the current design paradigm continues, rather than observed in a study.

The paper identifies harms from current AI interfaces and proposes a solution. The proposed solution is speculative but grounded in existing techniques. The harms are well-supported by literature from multiple fields.

SOURCE     arXiv cs.CY (Computers and Society) (tier 1)
   ↓
DOCUMENT   7a62e456-92e6-49f4-aaeb-39c1e460fc50
           https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.12878
   ↓
EVIDENCE   3 extracted excerpts
   ↓
MODEL RUN  4 runs, methodology 1.0.1
   ↓
SCORE      -1  (Mixed or uncertain)
   ↓
CONFIDENCE 68%