Exploring a Behavioral Model of "Positive Friction" in Human-AI Interaction
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Designing seamless, frictionless user experiences has long been a dominant trend in both applied behavioral science and artificial intelligence (AI), in which the goal of making desirable actions easy and efficient informs efforts to minimize friction in user experiences. However, in some settings, friction can be genuinely beneficial, such as the insertion of deliberate delays to increase reflection, preventing individuals from resorting to automatic or biased behaviors, and enhancing opportunities for unexpected discoveries. More recently, the popularization and availability of AI on a widespread scale has only increased the need to examine how friction can help or hinder users of AI; it also suggests a need to consider how positive friction can benefit AI practitioners, both during development processes (e.g., working with diverse teams) and to inform how AI is designed into offerings. This paper first proposes a "positive friction" model that can help characterize how friction is currently beneficial in user and developer experiences with AI, diagnose the potential need for friction where it may not yet exist in these contexts, and inform how positive friction can be used to generate solutions, especially as advances in AI continue to be progress and new opportunities emerge. It then explores this model in the context of AI users and developers by proposing the value of taking a hybrid "AI+human" lens, and concludes by suggesting questions for further exploration.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Feb 2024.
Builds on
5 of 70 references.
References · 5
- 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
- 2018Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretabilitycited by 256
- 2023Gender-Inclusive Grammatical Error Correction through Augmentationcited by 6
- 2023Why They're Worried: Examining Experts' Motivations for Signing the 'Pause Letter'cited by 2
- 2017Persuasive Technology For Human Development: Review and Case Studycited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 6.
9 papers.
- 2025Dynamic Epistemic Friction in Dialoguecited by 4
- 2025Trapped by Expectations: Functional Fixedness in LLM-Enabled Chat Searchcited by 3
- 2026Architecting Trust in Artificial Epistemic Agentscited by 3
- 2025Autonomy by Design: Preserving Human Autonomy in AI Decision-Supportcited by 1
- 2026Alignment-Process-Outcome: Rethinking How AIs and Humans Collaboratecited by 1
- 2026Beyond Compliance: How AI Could Help Creative Writers by Refusing Themcited by 0
- 2026It Matters How You Say It: Exploring Rhetorical Patterns for AI-Assisted Information Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026AI as Friction for Reflection Support in Ideationcited by 0
- 2026DocuTeam: Mixed-Initiative Multi-Agent Discussions around Evolving Documentscited by 0
- 2026DocuTeam: Mixed-Initiative Multi-Agent Discussions around Evolving Documents24 Sep 2026
- 2026AI as Friction for Reflection Support in Ideation29 Jul 2026
- 2026It Matters How You Say It: Exploring Rhetorical Patterns for AI-Assisted Information Evaluation20 Jul 2026
- 2026Beyond Compliance: How AI Could Help Creative Writers by Refusing Them3 Apr 2026
- 2026Alignment-Process-Outcome: Rethinking How AIs and Humans Collaborate9 Mar 2026
- 2026Architecting Trust in Artificial Epistemic Agents3 Mar 2026
- 2025Autonomy by Design: Preserving Human Autonomy in AI Decision-Support30 Jun 2025
- 2025Dynamic Epistemic Friction in Dialogue12 Jun 2025
- 2025Trapped by Expectations: Functional Fixedness in LLM-Enabled Chat Search2 Apr 2025