Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates how different interface types鈥擰uestion-Answer Interface (QAI) and Document Interface (DI)鈥攁ffect blind and low-vision (BLV) users' ability to construct interconnected knowledge while interacting with large language model systems. Through a comparative analysis involving interaction logs, concept maps, and user interviews, the research reveals that participants using the DI accessed more distinct documents and developed larger, more accurate mental models compared to those using the QAI. Despite these findings, many participants preferred the QAI, mistakenly believing it facilitated better knowledge acquisition, highlighting potential risks in relying on QAI for information access.
Users may prefer Q&A interfaces for their perceived ease, but they actually hinder knowledge construction compared to traditional document navigation.
Blind and low-vision (BLV) users are increasingly engaging with large language model (LLM) interfaces to access documents, but it is unclear how such systems support or hinder their ability to build interconnected knowledge. To examine this gap, we compared a Question-Answer Interface (QAI) that supports open-ended conversational inquiry, with a Document Interface (DI) based mostly on traditional structured text document navigation. We recruited 16 BLV screen reader users where they used both interfaces to explore two fictional worlds. Data from interaction logs, concept maps, decision-based tasks, and semi-structured interviews provide comparative insights into how interface design supports knowledge construction. Findings show that participants visited more distinct documents with the DI and formed larger and more correct mental models with the DI than with the QAI. They were also more able to apply knowledge they had gained. Simultaneously, many still preferred the QAI and often estimated that they had explored more, formed better mental models and applied their models better when acquiring the information with the QAI, despite this not being the case. Our analysis suggests possible interface design reasons for these differences and highlights some of the risks introduced by using question-answer interfaces to access information spaces.
