Understanding and Supporting Formal Email Exchange by Answering AI-Generated Questions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Replying to formal emails is time-consuming and cognitively demanding, as it requires crafting polite phrasing and providing an adequate response to the sender's demands. Although systems with Large Language Models (LLMs) were designed to simplify the email replying process, users still need to provide detailed prompts to obtain the expected output. Therefore, we proposed and evaluated an LLM-powered question-and-answer (QA)-based approach for users to reply to emails by answering a set of simple and short questions generated from the incoming email. We developed a prototype system, ResQ, and conducted controlled and field experiments with 12 and 8 participants. Our results demonstrated that the QA-based approach improves the efficiency of replying to emails and reduces workload while maintaining email quality, compared to a conventional prompt-based approach that requires users to craft appropriate prompts to obtain email drafts. We discuss how the QA-based approach influences the email reply process and interpersonal relationship dynamics, as well as the opportunities and challenges associated with using a QA-based approach in AI-mediated communication.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 87 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2025.
Builds on
19 of 87 references.
References · 19
- 2023A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Modelscited by 1,227
- 2023A Comprehensive Survey of AI-Generated Content (AIGC): A History of Generative AI from GAN to ChatGPTcited by 221
- 2020A Survey on Conversational Recommender Systemscited by 142
- 2019Gmail Smart Compose: Real-Time Assisted Writingcited by 97
- 2021The Impact of Multiple Parallel Phrase Suggestions on Email Input and Composition Behaviour of Native and Non-Native English Writerscited by 61
- 2016Smart Reply: Automated Response Suggestion for Emailcited by 54
- 2024Shaping Human-AI Collaboration: Varied Scaffolding Levels in Co-writing with Language Modelscited by 51
- 2023Principled Instructions Are All You Need for Questioning LLaMA-1/2, GPT-3.5/4cited by 48
- 2022LaMPost: Design and Evaluation of an AI-assisted Email Writing Prototype for Adults with Dyslexiacited by 27
- 2024"If the Machine Is As Good As Me, Then What Use Am I?" -- How the Use of ChatGPT Changes Young Professionals' Perception of Productivity and Accomplishmentcited by 19
- 2023From Text to Self: Users' Perceptions of Potential of AI on Interpersonal Communication and Selfcited by 18
- 2023"AI enhances our performance, I have no doubt this one will do the same": The Placebo effect is robust to negative descriptions of AIcited by 11
7 more
- 2023Comparing Sentence-Level Suggestions to Message-Level Suggestions in AI-Mediated Communicationcited by 9
- 2018Toward Extractive Summarization of Online Forum Discussions via Hierarchical Attention Networkscited by 8
- 2023LLM-based Smart Reply (LSR): Enhancing Collaborative Performance with ChatGPT-mediated Smart Reply Systemcited by 8
- 2015Evolution of Conversations in the Age of Email Overloadcited by 5
- 2024AINeedsPlanner: A Workbook to Support Effective Collaboration Between AI Experts and Clientscited by 2
- 2017On (Commercial) Benefits of Automatic Text Summarization Systems in the News Domain: A Case of Media Monitoring and Media Response Analysiscited by 1
- 2017CrowdTone: Crowd-powered tone feedback and improvement system for emailscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 3.
5 papers.
- 2026BenchPreS: A Benchmark for Context-Aware Personalized Preference Selectivity of Persistent-Memory LLMscited by 7
- 2026Not My Truce: Personality Differences in AI-Mediated Workplace Negotiationcited by 2
- 2025StepWrite: Adaptive Planning for Speech-Driven Text Generationcited by 1
- 2025User Perceptions vs. Proxy LLM Judges: Privacy and Helpfulness in LLM Responses to Privacy-Sensitive Scenarioscited by 1
- 2026LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathycited by 0
- 2026LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathy12 Apr 2026
- 2026Not My Truce: Personality Differences in AI-Mediated Workplace Negotiation1 Apr 2026
- 2026BenchPreS: A Benchmark for Context-Aware Personalized Preference Selectivity of Persistent-Memory LLMs17 Mar 2026
- 2025User Perceptions vs. Proxy LLM Judges: Privacy and Helpfulness in LLM Responses to Privacy-Sensitive Scenarios23 Oct 2025
- 2025StepWrite: Adaptive Planning for Speech-Driven Text Generation6 Aug 2025