From human-centered to social-centered artificial intelligence: Assessing ChatGPT's impact through disruptive events
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) and dialogue agents represent a significant shift in artificial intelligence (AI) research, particularly with the recent release of the GPT family of models. ChatGPT's generative capabilities and versatility across technical and creative domains led to its widespread adoption, marking a departure from more limited deployments of previous AI systems. While society grapples with the emerging cultural impacts of this new societal-scale technology, critiques of ChatGPT's impact within machine learning research communities have coalesced around its performance or other conventional safety evaluations relating to bias, toxicity, and "hallucination." We argue that these critiques draw heavily on a particular conceptualization of the "human-centered" framework, which tends to cast atomized individuals as the key recipients of technology's benefits and detriments. In this article, we direct attention to another dimension of LLMs and dialogue agents' impact: their effects on social groups, institutions, and accompanying norms and practices. By analyzing ChatGPT's social impact through a social-centered framework, we challenge individualistic approaches in AI development and contribute to ongoing debates around the ethical and responsible deployment of AI systems. We hope this effort will call attention to more comprehensive and longitudinal evaluation tools (e.g., including more ethnographic analyses and participatory approaches) and compel technologists to complement human-centered thinking with social-centered approaches.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 31 May 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
8 papers.
- 2023Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systemscited by 157
- 2024LLMs as Research Tools: A Large Scale Survey of Researchers' Usage and Perceptionscited by 47
- 2024Confabulation: The Surprising Value of Large Language Model Hallucinationscited by 43
- 2024AI Hallucinations: A Misnomer Worth Clarifyingcited by 34
- 2026CIRCLE: A Framework for Evaluating AI from a Real-World Lenscited by 2
- 2024The Pragmatic Frames of Spurious Correlations in Machine Learning: Interpreting How and Why They Mattercited by 0
- 2025Perspectives on How Sociology Can Advance Theorizing about Human-Chatbot Interaction and Developing Chatbots for Social Goodcited by 0
- 2026Real-World AI Evaluation: How FRAME Generates Systematic Evidence to Resolve the Decision-Maker's Dilemmacited by 0
- 2026Real-World AI Evaluation: How FRAME Generates Systematic Evidence to Resolve the Decision-Maker's Dilemma28 Feb 2026
- 2026CIRCLE: A Framework for Evaluating AI from a Real-World Lens27 Feb 2026
- 2025Perspectives on How Sociology Can Advance Theorizing about Human-Chatbot Interaction and Developing Chatbots for Social Good7 Jul 2025
- 2024The Pragmatic Frames of Spurious Correlations in Machine Learning: Interpreting How and Why They Matter7 Nov 2024
- 2024LLMs as Research Tools: A Large Scale Survey of Researchers' Usage and Perceptions30 Oct 2024
- 2024Confabulation: The Surprising Value of Large Language Model Hallucinations6 Jun 2024
- 2024AI Hallucinations: A Misnomer Worth Clarifying9 Jan 2024
- 2023Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systems18 Oct 2023