Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates how the integration of an AI teammate affects communication dynamics in small teams during decision-making tasks. Using Group Communication Analysis and team surveys, the research reveals that while the AI is the most talkative member, its contributions are less informative, leading to decreased human interaction and feelings of belonging among team members. The findings highlight a significant social cost associated with AI presence, as greater AI dominance correlates with lower human engagement and perceived value within the team.
AI teammates may dominate conversations but leave human members feeling undervalued and less engaged in decision-making processes.
Conversational AI is increasingly positioned as a teammate rather than a tool, yet we know little about how its presence reshapes communication among the humans on the team. We examined sociocognitive communication dynamics in team decision-making using Group Communication Analysis (GCA), team surveys, and lexical analyses of team discourse. Teams completed a high-stakes moral-dilemma decision task in a randomized controlled study: 16 teams of two students plus an AI teammate, and 17 all-human teams of three. Across six GCA dimensions and survey outcomes, we find that the AI teammate was the single most talkative and self-cohesive member of every treatment team, yet its contributions carried the least new information and the lowest density. The presence of AI also reshaped communication amongst humans. In AI-human teams, human teammates showed lower responsivity and social impact toward one another and reported lower levels of belonging and status. Greater AI dominance in the conversation was associated with students feeling less valued as team members. Additionally, this social cost is immediate and present at baseline; it does not emerge over the course of the conversation. Drawing on these results, we discuss a research agenda extending to voice-based and longitudinal settings.