aiqbench analysis
This study addresses the critical challenge of gathering explainable AI (XAI) requirements from stroke survivors with communication disorders, proposing a video-based scaffolding protocol to overcome cognitive barriers. By testing four specific facilitation techniques and identifying inherent biases like normative bias, the research establishes essential guidelines for designing trustworthy brain-computer interfaces in rehabilitation settings. The work underscores that eliciting patient preferences regarding algorithmic transparency is not optional but a necessary prerequisite for ethical human-machine system design.
From Dyad to Triad: Eliciting XAI Requirements in Stroke Rehabilitation
arXiv:2607.25423v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Eliciting explainable AI (XAI) requirements from stroke survivors presents a methodological challenge with direct implications for the design of trustworthy brain-computer interfaces for rehabilitation. How can patients and caregivers articulate preferences about algorithmic transparency when they lack conceptual frameworks for explainability, and when standard elicitation approaches are structurally inadequate for users with acquired communication disorders? We present a video-based scaffolding protocol for XAI requirements elicitation, developed and piloted in a rehabilitation context. In a formative study with three stroke survivors (two with moderate-to-severe aphasia) and three caregivers, facilitators employed four scaffolding approaches alongside the videos: 1) analogical bridging mapping AI states to familiar systems, 2) projective personas depersonalising sensitive topics, 3) binary forcing reducing cognitive load, and 4) extended response time. These approaches successfully surfaced heterogeneous, sometimes conflicting XAI needs across participants. Reflexive analysis additionally revealed three systematic facilitation biases, namely, normative bias, hypothesis confirmation bias, and presence effect, where scaffolding inadvertently shaped responses. We present these as protocol risk guidelines for practitioners. Together, the protocol and guidelines constitute a reusable methodological contribution for eliciting patient-facing XAI requirements in rehabilitation, arguing that such elicitation is a necessary prerequisite for trustworthy human-machine systems design, not an optional preliminary.
Abstract:Eliciting explainable AI (XAI) requirements from stroke survivors presents a methodological challenge with direct implications for the design of trustworthy brain-computer interfaces for rehabilitation. How can patients and caregivers articulate preferences about algorithmic transparency when they lack conceptual frameworks for explainability, and when standard elicitation approaches are structurally inadequate for users with acquired communication disorders? We present a video-based scaffolding protocol for XAI requirements elicitation, developed and piloted in a rehabilitation context. In a formative study with three stroke survivors (two with moderate-to-severe aphasia) and three caregivers, facilitators employed four scaffolding approaches alongside the videos: 1) analogical bridging mapping AI states to familiar systems, 2) projective personas depersonalising sensitive topics, 3) binary forcing reducing cognitive load, and 4) extended response time. These approaches successfully surfaced heterogeneous, sometimes conflicting XAI needs across participants. Reflexive analysis additionally revealed three systematic facilitation biases, namely, normative bias, hypothesis confirmation bias, and presence effect, where scaffolding inadvertently shaped responses. We present these as protocol risk guidelines for practitioners. Together, the protocol and guidelines constitute a reusable methodological contribution for eliciting patient-facing XAI requirements in rehabilitation, arguing that such elicitation is a necessary prerequisite for trustworthy human-machine systems design, not an optional preliminary.
Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Emerging Technologies (cs.ET)
arXiv:2607.25423 [cs.HC]
(or arXiv:2607.25423v1 [cs.HC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.25423 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 221 words
Related coverage
ReactEMG Stroke: Healthy-to-Stroke Few-shot Adaptation for sEMG-Based Intent Detection
arXiv · Jun 12, 2026
Detecting Heel Strike and toe off Events Using Kinematic Methods and LSTM Models
arXiv · Aug 25, 2026
Pneumatic Units for Logic-based Sequential Excitation (PULSE) in Wearable Haptic Devices
arXiv · Aug 24, 2026
Beyond Tech’s Power: On Status, Sacrifice, and the Search for Legitimacy
LessWrong · Aug 4, 2026