AI and Agency: Benefiting Users by Understanding and Serving Explicit Aspirations
Cover of the Journal of Online Trust and Safety, Volume 3, Issue 4, 2026. The journal's name runs across the top in a large serif face over a thin red rule. Below it, on the left, "Volume 3 · Issue 4 · 2026" in spaced small capitals and the subtitle "Trust and Safety Research Conference Proceedings" in light gray; on the right, the Stanford Tech Impact and Policy Center, Freeman Spogli Institute wordmark. The contents follow in two sections with red serif headings. Under "Commentaries": "Regulating the 'Unregulatable': Why Policymakers Are in Paralysis When Regulating AI" by Sarah Barrington and Hannah Bailey; "Abuse Is Not Love: Failure to Recognize Technology-Facilitated Intimate Partner Violence" by Nina Jane Patel; "Mandating Data Interoperability as a Tool for Improving Youth Wellbeing on Social Media" by Alexis Hiniker, Jenny Radesky, and Marie Bragg; "The Far-Reaching Implications of Brazil's Supreme Court Decision for Platform Governance" by Beatriz Kira and Ivar Hartmann; and "Beyond Content-Based Enforcement" by Jeffrey W. Howard. Under "Research Articles": "Trust and Safety of Human- and AI-Powered Visual Description: A Case Study of Be My Eyes" by Natalie Grace Brigham and Tadayoshi Kohno; "AI and Agency: Benefiting Users by Understanding and Serving Explicit Aspirations" by Emily Xing, Ravi Iyer, Rachel Xu, Yuning Liu, Beth Goldberg, and Nathanael J. Fast; "The Backbone of Abuse: How Infrastructure Providers Enable the Proliferation of AI-Generated Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery" by Sarah Morgan, Hany Farid, and Sophie J. Nightingale; and "'It Doesn't Violate Our Community Standards': Examining Social Media Platforms' Moderation Practices for User-Reported Rule-Breaking Tobacco Content" by George D. H. Pearson, Padmini Kucherlapaty, Nathan A. Silver, Barbara A. Schillo, and Jennifer M. Kreslake. Each title is in bold dark gray with its authors in lighter gray beneath. The lower third of the cover is artwork in the same muted palette: a wireframe globe drawn in thin gray lines, cut off by the bottom edge, with a dotted map of Brazil on its face, a small soft-edged halftone heart to its lower right, and a network of gray and red nodes joined by curved lines that together trace the outline of an eye. Faint fanned waves of gray and pale red lines sweep across the lower page behind and around the globe. A thin dark gray frame runs just inside the edge of the cover.
PDF

Keywords

agency
human-AI interaction
user preferences
user control
technology design

Categories

How to Cite

Xing, E., Iyer, R., Xu, R., Liu, Y., Goldberg, B., & Fast, N. (2026). AI and Agency: Benefiting Users by Understanding and Serving Explicit Aspirations. Journal of Online Trust and Safety, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.54501/jots.v3i4.352

Abstract

This paper introduces a framework for understanding how generative AI affects user agency, drawing on psychological research distinguishing between expressed preferences and immediate, often-regretted desires. We conducted a study examining how AI usage relates to users’ self-reported capacity for accomplishing goals along with the potential benefits of providing users with a sense of control over AI tools. This study with a nationally representative sample of U.S. generative AI users examined users’ aspirational preferences for AI usage; where they perceive capability (outcome control) gains from AI; users’ perceived control over AI tool experiences (process control); the relationship between perceived control over AI experiences and reported capability gains; where users locate their concerns about AI; and whether reported gains differ across demographic groups. Results indicate that users primarily both value and report benefit from AI in instrumental domains (e.g., task completion, information gathering, and learning). Aspirations for, and experiences of, benefits related to social and affective domains were less common. Users most commonly reported concerns about AI eroding independent thinking and agency. Importantly, users who felt more empowered to shape AI outputs (process control) also reported greater capability gains (outcome control), although exploratory analyses suggest these gains are unevenly distributed across demographic groups. We argue that centering user agency, encompassing control over both product experience and product outcomes, should be a primary design principle.

https://doi.org/10.54501/jots.v3i4.352
PDF
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2026 Ravi Iyer, Rachel Xu, Emily Xing, Yuning Liu, Beth Goldberg, Nathanael Fast