Chatbots for Data Collection in Surveys: A Comparison of Four Theory-Based Interview Probes
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Surveys are a widespread method for collecting data at scale, but their rigid structure often limits the depth of qualitative insights obtained. While interviews naturally yield richer responses, they are challenging to conduct across diverse locations and large participant pools. To partially bridge this gap, we investigate the potential of using LLM-based chatbots to support qualitative data collection through interview probes embedded in surveys. We assess four theory-based interview probes: descriptive, idiographic, clarifying, and explanatory. Through a split-plot study design (N=64), we compare the probes' impact on response quality and user experience across three key stages of HCI research: exploration, requirements gathering, and evaluation. Our results show that probes facilitate the collection of high-quality survey data, with specific probes proving effective at different research stages. We contribute practical and methodological implications for using chatbots as research tools to enrich qualitative data collection.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 11 Mar 2025.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 4.
9 papers.
- 2025BED-LLM: Intelligent Information Gathering with LLMs and Bayesian Experimental Designcited by 24
- 2025The Impact of a Chatbot's Ephemerality-Framing on Self-Disclosure Perceptionscited by 6
- 2026What Makes a Good Response? An Empirical Analysis of Quality in Qualitative Interviewscited by 1
- 2026Towards Proactive Information Probing: Customer Service Chatbots Harvesting Value from Conversationcited by 1
- 2025Theory of Mind and Self-Disclosure to CUIscited by 0
- 2025Not Everything That Counts Can Be Counted: A Case for Safe Qualitative AIcited by 0
- 2025Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspectivecited by 0
- 2026AInterviewer: A Platform for Designing and Conducting AI-led Qualitative Interviewscited by 0
- 2026Faithful Where It Can Be Checked: Auditing a Reflection Agent Against Its System Prompt in a Randomized Trialcited by 0
- 2026Faithful Where It Can Be Checked: Auditing a Reflection Agent Against Its System Prompt in a Randomized Trial17 Sep 2026
- 2026AInterviewer: A Platform for Designing and Conducting AI-led Qualitative Interviews15 May 2026
- 2026Towards Proactive Information Probing: Customer Service Chatbots Harvesting Value from Conversation13 Apr 2026
- 2026What Makes a Good Response? An Empirical Analysis of Quality in Qualitative Interviews6 Apr 2026
- 2025Software Vulnerability Management in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: An Industry Perspective20 Dec 2025
- 2025Not Everything That Counts Can Be Counted: A Case for Safe Qualitative AI12 Nov 2025
- 2025BED-LLM: Intelligent Information Gathering with LLMs and Bayesian Experimental Design28 Aug 2025
- 2025Theory of Mind and Self-Disclosure to CUIs14 Jul 2025
- 2025The Impact of a Chatbot's Ephemerality-Framing on Self-Disclosure Perceptions26 May 2025