Impact Assessment Card: Communicating Risks and Benefits of AI Uses
Edyta Paulina Bogucka, Marios Constantinides, Sanja Scepanovic, Daniele Quercia
Abstract
Communicating the risks and benefits of AI is important for regulation and public understanding. Yet current methods such as technical reports often exclude people without technical expertise. Drawing on HCI research, we developed an Impact Assessment Card to present this information more clearly. We held three focus groups with a total of 12 participants who helped identify design requirements and create early versions of the card. We then tested a refined version in an online study with 235 participants, including AI developers, compliance experts, and members of the public selected to reflect the U.S. population by age, sex, and race. Participants used either the card or a full impact assessment report to write an email supporting or opposing a proposed AI system. The card led to faster task completion and higher-quality emails across all groups. We discuss how design choices can improve accessibility and support AI governance. Examples of cards are available at: https://social-dynamics.net/ai-risks/impact-card/
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 93be0dff-6042-4316-9300-6d5cc53afe98Cited by top-tier papers3
- Who Controls the Conversation? User Perspectives on Generative AI (LLM) System PromptsAnna Neumann, Yulu Pi, Jatinder SinghCHI 2026 · 3 citations
- PASTA: A Scalable Framework for Multi-Policy AI Compliance EvaluationYu Yang, Ig-Jae Kim, Dongwook YoonCHI 2026 · 1 citation
- Certified AI System = Trustworthy? Exploring Expert and Lay User Perceptions and Needs Regarding AI CertificationSarah Abdelwahab Gaballah, Nur Efsan Cetinkaya, Magdalena Wischnewski, Martina Angela SasseCHI 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on22
- Conceptual Metaphors Impact Perceptions of Human-AI CollaborationPranav Khadpe, Ranjay Krishna, Li Fei-Fei, Jeffrey T. Hancock et al.CSCW 2020 · 179 citations
- Expanding Modes of Reflection in Design FuturingSandjar Kozubaev, Chris Elsden, Noura Howell, Marie Louise Juul Søndergaard et al.CHI 2020 · 171 citations
- Everyday Algorithm Auditing: Understanding the Power of Everyday Users in Surfacing Harmful Algorithmic BehaviorsHong Shen, Alicia DeVos, Motahhare Eslami, Kenneth HolsteinCSCW 2021 · 156 citations
- Toward User-Driven Algorithm Auditing: Investigating users' strategies for uncovering harmful algorithmic behaviorAlicia DeVos, Aditi Dhabalia, Hong Shen, Kenneth Holstein et al.CHI 2022 · 96 citations
- Algorithmic Risk Assessments Can Alter Human Decision-Making Processes in High-Stakes Government ContextsBen Green, Yiling ChenCSCW 2021 · 63 citations
Related papers
- Regulating AI: Where U.S. State Policy and HCI (Mis)alignNino Migineishvili, Alice Gao, Adinawa Adjagbodjou, Dhanaraj Thakur et al.CHI 2026 · 1 citation
- "I think this is fair": Uncovering the Complexities of Stakeholder Decision-Making in AI Fairness AssessmentLin Luo, Yuri Nakao, Mathieu Chollet, Hiroya Inakoshi et al.CHI 2026 · 1 citation
- Locating Risk: Task Designers and the Challenge of Risk Disclosure in Crowdsourced RAI Content Work CSCW029Alice Qian, Ryland Shaw, Laura Dabbish, Jina Suh et al.CSCW 2026
- How Tech Workers Contend with Hazards of Humanlikeness in Generative AIMark Diaz, Renee Shelby, Eric Corbett, Andrew SmartCHI 2026 · 1 citation
- Empowering Stakeholders with Participatory Auditing of Predictive AI: Perspectives from End-Users and Decision Subjects without AI ExpertisePatrizia Di Campli San Vito, Eva Fringi, Penny S. Johnston, Leonardo C. T. Bezerra et al.CHI 2026 · 3 citations
