Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly become ubiquitous, demonstrating remarkable proficiency in generating text and responding to prompts. Despite their potential, concerns about privacy and trust persist, yet methods for engaging end-users in designing privacy-conscious AI remain limited. This paper presents a replicable co-design methodology for engaging end-users in privacy-conscious LLM design. Through workshops with 36 participants across three speculative scenarios—mental health applications, travel assistants, and workplace assistants—we demonstrate how combining speculative scenarios with established frameworks (Grice’s Maxims, Schaub’s privacy design space) and trained facilitators enables meaningful participation from users without technical expertise. The co-designed dialogues reveal that users desire dynamic, context-sensitive privacy communication that leverages LLMs’ conversational capabilities. We provide practitioners with a replicable methodology comprising: (1) scenario creation methods, (2) framework scaffolding approaches, and (3) facilitator training guidance, alongside design implications for privacy-conscious conversational AI.

AI assistants such as Alexa, Google Assistant, and Siri, are making their way into the healthcare sector, offering a convenient way for users to access different healthcare services. Trust is a vital factor in the uptake of healthcare services, but the factors affecting trust in voice assistants used for healthcare are under-explored and this specialist domain introduces additional requirements. This study explores the effects of different functional, personal, and risk factors on trust in and adoption of healthcare voice AI assistants (HVAs), generating a partial least squares structural model from a survey of 300 voice assistant users. Our results indicate that trust in HVAs can be significantly explained by functional factors (usefulness, content credibility, quality of service relative to a healthcare professional), together with security, and privacy risks and personal stance in technology. We also discuss differences in terms of trust between HVAs and general-purpose voice assistants as well as implications that are unique to HVAs.

Since Siri’s release in 2011 there have been a growing number of AI-driven domestic voice assistants that are increasingly being integrated into devices such as smartphones and TVs. But as their presence has expanded, a range of ethical concerns have been identified around the use of voice assistants, such as the privacy implications of having devices that are always listening and the ways that these devices are integrated into the existing social order of the home. This has created a burgeoning area of research across a range of fields including computer science, social science, and psychology. This paper takes stock of the foundations and frontiers of this work through a systematic literature review of 117 papers on ethical concerns with voice assistants. In addition to analysis of nine specific areas of concern, the review measures the distribution of methods and participant demographics across the literature. We show how some concerns, such as privacy, are operationalized to a much greater extent than others like accessibility, and how study participants are overwhelmingly drawn from a small handful of Western nations. In so doing we hope to provide an outline of the rich tapestry of work around these concerns and highlight areas where current research efforts are lacking.

To improve user experience, Alexa now allows users to consent to data sharing via voice rather than directing them to the companion smartphone app. While verbal consent mechanisms for voice assistants (VAs) can increase usability, they can also undermine principles core to informed consent. We conducted a Delphi study with experts from academia, industry, and the public sector on requirements for verbal consent in VAs. Candidate requirements were drawn from the literature, regulations, and research ethics guidelines that participants rated based on their relevance to the consent process, actionability by platforms, and usability by end-users, discussing their reasoning as the study progressed. We highlight key areas of (dis)agreement between experts, deriving recommendations for regulators, skill developers, and VA platforms towards crafting meaningful verbal consent mechanisms. Key themes include approaching permissions according to the user’s ability to opt-out, minimising consent decisions, and ensuring platforms follow established consent principles.

Critical examinations of AI systems often apply principles such as fairness, justice, accountability, and safety, which is reflected in AI regulations such as the EU AI Act. Are such principles sufficient to promote the design of systems that support human flourishing? Even if a system is in some sense fair, just, or 'safe', it can nonetheless be exploitative, coercive, inconvenient, or otherwise conflict with cultural, individual, or social values. This paper proposes a dimension of interactional ethics thus far overlooked: the ways AI systems should treat human beings. For this purpose, we explore the philosophical concept of respect: if respect is something everyone needs and deserves, shouldn't technology aim to be respectful? Despite its intuitive simplicity, respect in philosophy is a complex concept with many disparate senses. Like fairness or justice, respect can characterise how people deserve to be treated; but rather than relating primarily to the distribution of benefits or punishments, respect relates to how people regard one another, and how this translates to perception, treatment, and behaviour. We explore respect broadly across several literatures, synthesising perspectives on respect from Kantian, post-Kantian, dramaturgical, and agential realist design perspectives with a goal of drawing together a view of what respect could mean for AI. In so doing, we identify ways that respect may guide us towards more sociable artefacts that ethically and inclusively honour and recognise humans using the rich social language that we have evolved to interact with one another every day.

Modern conversational agents such as Alexa and Google Assistant represent significant progress in speech recognition, natural language processing, and speech synthesis. But as these agents have grown more realistic, concerns have been raised over how their social nature might unconsciously shape our interactions with them. Through a survey of 500 voice assistant users, we explore whether users' relationships with their voice assistants can be quantified using the same metrics as social, interpersonal relationships; as well as if this correlates with how much they trust their devices and the extent to which they anthropomorphise them. Using Knapp's staircase model of human relationships, we find that not only can human-device interactions be modelled in this way, but also that relationship development with voice assistants correlates with increased trust and anthropomorphism.

The increasingly widespread use of 'smart' devices has raised multifarious ethical concerns regarding their use in domestic spaces. Previous work examining such ethical dimensions has typically either involved empirical studies of concerns raised by specific devices and use contexts, or alternatively expounded on abstract concepts like autonomy, privacy or trust in relation to 'smart homes' in general. This paper attempts to bridge these approaches by asking what features of smart devices users consider as rendering them 'smart' and how these relate to ethical concerns. Through a multimethod investigation including surveys with smart device users (n=120) and semi-structured interviews (n=15), we identify and describe eight types of smartness and explore how they engender a variety of ethical concerns including privacy, autonomy, and disruption of the social order. We argue that this middle ground, between concerns arising from particular devices and more abstract ethical concepts, can better anticipate potential ethical concerns regarding smart devices.

Beyond being the world's largest social network, Facebook is for many also one of its greatest sources of digital distraction. For students, problematic use has been associated with negative effects on academic achievement and general wellbeing. To understand what strategies could help users regain control, we investigated how simple interventions to the Facebook UI affect behaviour and perceived control. We assigned 58 university students to one of three interventions: goal reminders, removed newsfeed, or white background (control). We logged use for 6 weeks, applied interventions in the middle weeks, and administered fortnightly surveys. Both goal reminders and removed newsfeed helped participants stay on task and avoid distraction. However, goal reminders were often annoying, and removing the newsfeed made some fear missing out on information. Our findings point to future interventions such as controls for adjusting types and amount of available information, and flexible blocking which matches individual definitions of 'distraction'.

Connected devices in the home represent a potentially grave new privacy threat due to their unfettered access to the most personal spaces in people's lives. Prior work has shown that despite concerns about such devices, people often lack sufficient awareness, understanding, or means of taking effective action. To explore the potential for new tools that support such needs directly we developed Aretha, a privacy assistant technology probe that combines a network disaggregator, personal tutor, and firewall, to empower end-users with both the knowledge and mechanisms to control disclosures from their homes. We deployed Aretha in three households over six weeks, with the aim of understanding how this combination of capabilities might enable users to gain awareness of data disclosures by their devices, form educated privacy preferences, and to block unwanted data flows. The probe, with its novel affordances-and its limitations-prompted users to co-adapt, finding new control mechanisms and suggesting new approaches to address the challenge of regaining privacy in the connected home.