Conversational agents that participate in or mediate group interaction introduce challenges that extend beyond supporting individual users, raising new questions about how agents participate in and influence groups. To characterise this emerging design space, we present a systematic review of 53 peer-reviewed studies on group conversational agents (GCAs). We analyse how GCAs intervene in group-level processes, including participation regulation, conflict mediation, task alignment, and execution support. Using concepts from group research as an analytic lens, we organise prior GCA work around recurring group interactional challenges (orientation, conflict, alignment, and execution), and examine the roles agents are designed to play in addressing these challenges. We find that GCAs are predominantly designed as short-term, role-bounded interventions targeting isolated challenges in bounded interactional contexts. We further identify recurring structural tensions in GCA design, including tradeoffs between visibility and discretion, proactivity and group autonomy, and agent authority and group ownership. Together, these findings clarify how current GCAs are positioned within group interaction, surface the implicit assumptions embedded in their designs, and outline open questions for future research on conversational agents as group-level interventions.

Intergenerational conversations often break down when differences in tone, language, or expectations lead participants to feel dismissed or misunderstood. In this work, we explore how people envision AI-driven chatbot interventions for addressing communication problems in text-based intergenerational family chat. We conducted a scenario-based design interview with 10 pairs of family members from different generations, in which participants designed chatbot interventions that varied in intervention target and timing. Our findings show that participants expect chatbots to perform multiple themes of intervention, including mediating understanding, providing emotional support, offering evaluative commentary, and guiding interaction through behavioral suggestions. These expectations varied systematically across intervention contexts, giving rise to distinct chatbot roles such as neutral mediators, message coaches, repair facilitators, and emotion regulators. Across these roles, participants positioned chatbots as moral advisors that evaluate communicative appropriateness and exercise varying degrees of moral authority. Rather than prescribing specific system behaviors, this work offers a conceptual and exploratory account of AI-mediated intervention in intergenerational communication, and articulates key design tensions that arise when chatbots are imagined as socially and morally involved actors in intimate family interactions.

Designing adaptive tutoring systems for software learning presents challenges in determining appropriate instructional modalities. To inform the design of such systems, we conducted an observational study of ten human teacher-student pairs (N=10), where experienced design software users taught novices two new graphic design software features through multi-step procedures. These lessons were limited to three communication channels (speech, visual annotations, and remote screen control) to mimic possible AI tutor modalities. We found that annotations complement speech with spatial precision and remote control complements it with spatial and temporal precision, but both cause intrusion to learner agency. Teachers adaptively select modalities to balance the need for instruction progress with students’ cognitive engagement and sense of digital territory ownership. Our results provide further support to the contiguity principles and the value of agency in learning, while suggesting precision-agency trade-off and digital territoriality as new design constraints for adaptive software guidance.

Generative AI technologies are reshaping everyday environments by enabling multimodal interaction. As their ubiquity and agentic capacities grow, there is a pressing need to understand how these systems reshape human–computer interaction in relational, social, and systemic terms. We introduce a scenario-based design pack for investigating Human–GenAI relations. Grounded in assemblage theory and structured around a three-stage process—Prepare, Make, Reflect—the pack supports the prototyping, analysis, and critical reflection of emergent sociotechnical configurations. We evaluated the pack across three deployments: an ACM workshop (n=22), a multidisciplinary design session (n=20), and a university HCI class (n=260). Participants generated scenarios that surfaced relational issues of power, agency, visibility, and care. We contribute the design pack alongside an exploratory framework to advance relational enquiry into multimodal Human–GenAI relations, support more inclusive and socially responsive GenAI practices, and complement FATE approaches by grounding fairness, accountability, and transparency in lived, multimodal configurations.

Generative AI tools can provide people with the ability to create virtual environments and scenes with natural language prompts. Yet, how people will formulate such prompts is unclear—particularly when they inhabit the environment that they are designing. For instance, it is likely that a person might say, “Put a chair here,” while pointing at a location. If such linguistic and embodied features are common to people’s prompts, we need to tune models to accommodate them. In this work, we present a Wizard of Oz elicitation study with 22 participants, where we studied people’s implicit expectations when verbally prompting such programming agents to create interactive VR scenes. Our findings show when people prompted the agent, they had several implicit expectations of these agents: (1) they should have an embodied knowledge of the environment; (2) they should understand embodied prompts by users; (3) they should recall previous states of the scene and the conversation, and that (4) they should have a commonsense understanding of objects in the scene. Further, we found that participants prompted differently when they were prompting in situ (i.e. within the VR environment) versus ex situ (i.e. viewing the VR environment from the outside). To explore how these lessons could be applied, we designed and built Ostaad, a conversational programming agent that allows non-programmers to design interactive VR experiences that they inhabit. Based on these explorations, we outline new opportunities and challenges for conversational programming agents that create VR environments.