Skip to content

AI-Conducted Interviews in Empirical Software Engineering: An Experience Report

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.14452 · 0 citations · 35 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

AI interviewers should be treated as a complementary option for short, focused, low-risk studies, with protocol design, privacy guidance, artifact validation, and human oversight, but do not establish completion rates, time savings, summary fidelity, or equivalence to human-conducted interviews.

Abstract

Semi-structured interviews are widely used in empirical software engineering (ESE), but they are resource-intensive and difficult to coordinate across schedules, locations, and natural languages. This experience report examines a customized MyGPT used to conduct short, self-administered interviews in two ESE studies: one on refactoring practices and another on generative AI in Scrum-related activities. Participants accessed the interviewer through shared links, used voice interaction, selected a preferred natural language, and completed the interview without a researcher present. The AI followed a predefined protocol and generated a structured synthesis that participants voluntarily submitted; these artifacts were not treated as verbatim transcripts. We analyzed 66 submissions and questionnaire responses, and audited artifact format, language, length, and protocol consistency. Of the submitted artifacts, 92.4% followed the expected synthesis format, 65 were predominantly in Portuguese and one in English, and two conflicted with the reported protocol. Participants generally rated the experience positively: 90.9% reported a positive overall experience and comfort, 95.5% considered the questions clear, 97.0% rated the pace positively, and 89.4% would participate again. Reported limitations included generic questions, limited sensitivity to answers, insufficient depth, privacy concerns, and missed human interaction. The findings support the operational viability and acceptability of this workflow among analyzed respondents, but do not establish completion rates, time savings, summary fidelity, or equivalence to human-conducted interviews. AI interviewers should therefore be treated as a complementary option for short, focused, low-risk studies, with protocol design, privacy guidance, artifact validation, and human oversight.

View source

Similar papers

Review Sep 2026

Helpful but Fallible: Developer Experiences of AI Tools Under a Coordinated Industrial Roll-out

AI-enabled software development tools (AI-devtools) are being industrially adopted under strong expectations of productivity gains, yet developers'experiences of such roll-outs are underexplored. Organizations commit budgets, evaluate staff, and revise practice on a partial picture, since the evidence base is mainly to...

Andreas Bexell, Rushali Gupta, L. Heander et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

AI-assisted Script Management for Requirements Elicitation Interviews

An AI-assisted elicitation workflow that combines theory-guided script generation grounded in business goals with live support for topic coverage tracking and on-demand follow-up question generation is presented, positioning AI-assisted workflows as elicitation scaffolds for future studies.

Anmol Singhal, Paulo Carvalho, Travis D. Breaux · 0 citations
Book Open access Sep 2026

Interviewing Silicon Experts: A Persona-Based LLM Interview Pipeline in Automated Driving

Human expert interviews are valuable but often limited by slow recruitment, scarce expertise, and network-based sampling, especially for abstract human-automation topics requiring multidisciplinary input. This paper presents a persona-based LLM expert-interview pipeline for structuring expert knowledge before human inv...

Yi-Lei Fang, P. Bazilinskyy, Marieke H. Martens · 0 citations
Open access Mar 2025

LLMs’ reshaping of people, processes, products, and society in software development: a qualitative exploration with early adopters

Interviews with sixteen early-adopter software professionals who integrated LLM-based tools into their day-to-day work in early to mid-2023 offer actionable implications for developers, organizations, educators, and tool designers seeking to integrate LLMs responsibly into professional software practice.

Benyamin T. Tabarsi, Heidi Reichert, Sam Gilson et al. · 22 citations · ⚡1
Book Open access Aug 2026

Scaffolded AI-Verification: Assessment Patterns for Resource-Constrained Environments.

A two-site qualitative study of Nigerian computing departments is reported, drawing on semi-structured interviews with students and academic staff and analysing the corpus through thematic analysis to characterise assessment practice under policy-light conditions, describing a persistent detection trap.

Kehinde D. Aruleba, Kike Ladipo, I. Sanusi et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.