# Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer: A Multi-Agent Framework with Perspective-Based Refinement for Qualitative Analysis

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.24600 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.24600/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 11 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.08155/) (2023)
- [MiniLM: Deep Self-Attention Distillation for Task-Agnostic Compression of Pre-Trained Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.10957/) (2020)
- [Supporting Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models: Combining Codebook with GPT-3 for Deductive Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.10548/) (2023)
- [LLM-in-the-loop: Leveraging Large Language Model for Thematic Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15100/) (2023)
- [CollabCoder: A Lower-barrier, Rigorous Workflow for Inductive Collaborative Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.07366/) (2023)
- [CoAIcoder: Examining the Effectiveness of AI-assisted Human-to-Human Collaboration in Qualitative Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05560/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models in Qualitative Research: Uses, Tensions, and Intentions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07362/) (2024)
- [HICode: Hierarchical Inductive Coding with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.17946/) (2025)
- [Efficiency with Rigor! A Trustworthy LLM-powered Workflow for Qualitative Data Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00775/) (2025)
- [Reflexis: Supporting Reflexivity and Rigor in Collaborative Qualitative Analysis through Design for Deliberation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.15445/) (2026)
- [The AI Co-Ethnographer: How Far Can Automation Take Qualitative Research?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00012/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Using Grounded Theory for Agent Behavior Analysis at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.30391/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for qualitative data analysis (QDA), yet their outputs often miss the depth and nuance of human analysis. We argue this gap reflects a missing credibility practice from human QDA: peer debriefing, in which an analyst seeks feedback from a disinterested peer and uses it to refine their coding. To bring this practice into LLM-assisted QDA, we propose Agent-as-Peer-Debriefer, a multi-agent QDA framework that builds peer debriefing into key coding steps. In our framework, a Hierarchical Coding Agent follows the standard QDA process to generate codes, sub-themes, and themes, along with self-explanations and reflection memos. It then shares these outputs with three Peer-Debriefing Agents, each applying a distinct analytical perspective (Theory-Driven, Data-Driven, or Applied) and refining the codes by keeping, renaming, reassigning, merging, or splitting them. These perspectives are drawn from established human QDA practices that generalize across domains and datasets. To evaluate the framework, we test it on three datasets across two domains with three LLMs, measuring semantic similarity to human-annotated codes. Across all settings, perspective-based, peer-debriefing refinement aligns more closely with human codes than a single-LLM baseline, and an ablation further shows the gain is not merely from additional refinement. The three perspectives also produce distinct trade-offs, showing that the choice of perspective is a meaningful and controllable design decision. More broadly, these findings suggest that simulating peer debriefing with explicit perspectives is a promising route to more credible LLM-assisted QDA.