Developing and evaluating a design method for positive artificial intelligence
Willem van der Maden, Derek Lomas, Paul Hekkert
Abstract
In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) permeates every facet of our lives, the imperative to steer AI development toward enhancing human wellbeing has never been more critical. However, the development of such positive AI poses substantial challenges due to the current lack of mature methods for addressing the complexities that designing AI for wellbeing poses. This article presents and evaluates the positive AI design method aimed at addressing this gap. The method provides a human-centered process for translating wellbeing aspirations into concrete interventions. First, we explain the method’s key steps: (1) contextualizing, (2) operationalizing, (3) designing, and (4) implementing supported by
Core problem
The problem is the absence of mature methodologies for designing AI systems that actively promote human wellbeing. Current design processes often fail to incorporate wellbeing as a core objective, resulting in systems that optimize narrow metrics rather than holistically enhancing human flourishing. The challenge includes conceptualizing, operationalizing, and designing AI interventions that measurably improve wellbeing while aligning with ethical and human-centered design principles.
Key findings and Contribution
- A positive AI design method was developed with the phases of contextualization, operationalization, design, implementation and continuous alignment.
- Multiple tools and frameworks, including an AI design kit, the IEEE-7010 standard and human-centered design techniques support the method.
- The use of the positive AI design method led to the development of AI systems that promote human wellbeing.
- Novice designers applied the positive AI design method in multiple contexts (dating apps, nutritional and food apps and music streaming platforms), with initial challenges but improved integration of wellbeing considerations over time.
- Design outcomes of the case studies included enhanced user autonomy and relatedness, the promotion of mindful eating and social connections and the encouragement of musical exploration and personal growth.
- Expert evaluation of the AI system concepts showed moderately high ratings for perceived realism, wellbeing impact, business desirability and technical feasibility.
Limitations
- The novice designers faced initial difficulties in navigating wellbeing literature and translating qualitative aims into technical specifications.
- The method requires extensive user research and iterative testing and is therefore resource-intensive.
- The study only evaluated a single use of the method; long-term, repeated application in professional settings remains unexplored.
- The method thrives with multidisciplinary teams, which may not be feasible for all organizations.
- The method does not fully support co-design, which is essential for effective stakeholder engagement.
- Efficient techniques for large-scale stakeholder engagement are lacking, potentially limiting real-world feasibility.
Key quotes
Designing AI systems specifically to enhance human wellbeing introduces additional complexities. That is, wellbeing is inherently multifaceted, is variable across individuals, and manifests differently across cultural contexts, making it difficult to define and design for in a measurable way. AI systems often optimize narrow objectives, making it hard to ensure that they improve wellbeing holistically.
Type: Exposure of core technical challenges
The positive AI method involves ensuring that AI systems are sensitive to factors of human wellbeing and enabled to support them. Consequently, the five phases should help the designer to understand wellbeing in context (phase 1), to make it measurable (phase 2), to design systems (inter)actions that promote wellbeing (phase 3), to implement the designs (phase 4), and to sustain alignment (phase 5).
Type: Method development and implementation