Call for Manuscripts

Symbolic Interaction and AI
Studies in Symbolic Interaction
https://books.emeraldinsight.com/page/series-detail/studies-in-symbolic-interaction/

Abstract submission deadline: March 1, 2024

Artificial Intelligence (AI), an umbrella term that includes any device capable of emulating or even exceeding human capabilities, emerged as computer technologies became more sophisticated and complex. While AI currently evokes frightened responses associated with human replacement, it has a history of being useful regarding human enterprises. For instance, mathematical analysts have used AI to find patterns in huge sets of data. However, recent rapid developments in AI have utilized the pattern-matching capacity to create words, images, and sounds independent of human intention, often referred to as Generative AI.

In 2021, Open-AI introduced Dall-E, a-text-to-image generator that creates artworks after receiving text prompts from users. In 2022, Open-AI unveiled ChatGPT, a computer program designed to simulate conversation with users. After receiving inputs from users, ChatGPT displayed the capacity to provide lifelike answers, including grammatically correct essays that appeared filled with human insight.

Also in 2022, Google introduced an AI text-to-video generator that created high-definition videos from text prompts. When considering the above developments, Al has become equated with raw human intelligence, from authoring cogent essays to completing artistic and intricate designs. Most alarming, those who consume information and design feel that they cannot easily discern the difference between a genuine human creation or the work of AI.

As mentioned in regard to mathematical analysis, using AI for analytical purposes is not a new phenomenon. Neither is such use restricted to our current day-to-day lives. Before Dall-E, ChatGPT, and the AI video tool, humans have long employed “assisted living,” using AI technologies such as Alexa and Siri to create and assist voices, turn on and off appliances, answer short queries, and make transmission of information easier to accomplish. In addition, various AI programs appeared at workplaces that served as useful ways to type, make phone calls, and even to transport people from place to place.

One dimension of AI that fascinates students of technology is not only its capacity to simulate human activity, but to learn ways of communicating. Such learning emerges through the use of mathematical systems to find connections in huge data sets. The responses AI generate consist of pattern matching, or a process that connects words, images, and sounds to sequences of subsequent symbols.

In effect, AI is powered by large language models in which a bot can ingest huge amounts of data. Such ingestion enables a bot to predict and generate the most appropriate word or symbol to generate. While these chatbots do not duplicate human intelligence in that they lack the capacities to understand the environment around them or distinguish factual from non-factual information, they still represent potential dangers. Their incapacity to duplicate human intelligence becomes a source of intriguing content; the chatbots may churn out wrong or nonsensical information (a phenomenon called “hallucinations”) regarded as potential insights. In response to these hallucinations, humans work closely with AI as attendants in various fields including business, medicine, education, journalism, and public safety.

Despite the rapid advancement of AI, and the astonishing potential of AI in transforming social life, social scientists have not accumulated much knowledge regarding human-AI interaction. For this reason, it seems crucial to explore the implications of the emergent interaction between humans and AI technologies. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Vol. 61, Symbolic Interaction and AI, is devoted to examinations of the implications of utilizing AI in human reflexivity and social interaction.

Human Reflexivity and AI: From Dyad to Triad

AI, although designed to enhance efficiency and productivity, challenges human reflexivity in ways that we did not anticipate. When typing a sentence, AI accompanies a user in an intellectually intimate fashion by suggesting what is to be typed (specific words or phrases to be used) and flagging misspelled words and grammatical errors. Hence the user not only authors an intended statement but also constantly attends to AI suggestions. AI assisted typing may expedite the typing and enhance the quality of the text. However, the level of reflexivity needed when doing assisted typing seems to be substantial and laborious. AI assisted writing also gives a new definition to single authorship.

To further examine the activity of reflexivity and the use of AI, one may examine the interaction of AI with (a) I and Me, (b) Self and Generalized Other, and (c) Self and Other(s) in Symbolic Interaction literature.

I, Me, and AI

In classic Symbolic Interaction literature, reflexivity is conceptualized as the interaction between the I and the Me. Using AI creates the appearance of a generated I and Me, one that emerges in the creative process. Such emergence leads to question the relationship of the newly formed triad–I, Me, and AI. Specifically, is AI now challenging the authority of me? The question relates to how AI seems to be based on vast (objective) databases, while Me is based on one’s experiential (and subjective) socialization.

Self, Generalized Other, and AI

George Herbert Mead discussed the Self in reference to the Generalized Other, especially when engaged in the process of making an existential decision. Currently, however, AI’s emergence on the scene could make AI appear to be more applicable than the Generalized Other. As an immediate (and often forceful) source of correction, AI represents the seemingly reliable patterns found in vast databases, while Generalized Other appears less linked to current technology (and more associated with a less sophisticated process of socialization). As interactionists, we ask, what is the relationship between AI and the Self and AI and the Generalized Other? Are we in the process of confronting a newly formed triad consisting of the Self, Generalized Other, and AI?

Self, Other(s), and AI

Interactionists have maintained that humans take each other into account when engaging in social interaction. However, the emergence of AI leads to the question of how humans incorporate AI in their interaction with others. Should humans assign more weight to AI than the responses from other human interactants, if after all, AI becomes a more valid and objective source of information?

However, while AI may seem as more valid, it could subvert the human’s creative process. Suggestions by AI could actually be a form of second guessing, providing a barrage of useless suggestions. AI could clog a user’s creative process, by dispensing warnings or ‘error signals’ that interrupt the flow of human activity. Instead of coming up with new insights, AI can interrupt the reflexivity associated with creativity.

Social Interaction and AI

Among different forms of interaction with AI, the one that has garnered much attention is the use of AI companions for mental health. Although lacking the distinctly familiar companionship that humans experience with one another, an AI companion exhibits potential for mental health care. AI companions can assist with users? wellness and provide social support.

AI companions work to support mental wellness, first, by allowing a user to describe his/her mood through writing, voice, note, or video. Then, the AI companion would quickly analyze the user’s statement for signs of anxiety, depression, or loneliness, and provide a personalized, conversational recommendation for how the user can feel his/her best.

Chatbots, designed to provide digital companionship, provide conversations that appear helpful owing to the immediacy of responsiveness. Using the vast exemplary examples of human responsiveness, chatbots effectively (at least seemingly so) display provocative personality traits and conversational flair. In so doing, AI companions allow users to share their feelings and thoughts, provide empathetic language to support them, and help humans deal with loneliness, anxiety, and depression. The AI ‘therapists’ provide a sense of connection, and contribute to users’ well-being.

Questions to be addressed in this area also include how users develop relationships with AI companions like they do with traditional mental health providers, how trauma is processed using AI companions. Given the vast possibilities associated with the above, we welcome empirical research articles or conceptual papers that analyze and assess how AI is experienced in all human life endeavors. Topics to be addressed include, but not limit to:

• Mind and AI
• Self and AI
• Mental Health and AI
• Social Relationships and AI
• Medicine and AI
• Business and AI
• Education and AI
• Public Safety and AI

Please send an abstract of no more than 750 words to Shing-Ling Sarina Chen (sarina.chen@uni.edu) by March 1, 2024.

If the abstract is selected for inclusion, the final manuscript is due September 1, 2024.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Shing-Ling Sarina Chen
Studies in Symbolic Interaction