Who bears the cost of honesty?
Maybe you are thinking ...
If you’ve ever worried that AI support could be mistaken for cheating, this workshop gives you language to think through what fair disclosure should actually protect.
TODO DATE TIME (2 hrs) · Le Centre Sheraton Montréal
Disclosure is not a neutral act.
Governments and institutions are racing to mandate AI disclosure. Growing evidence shows that revealing AI use can stigmatize the user and their work — and that this stigma falls disproportionately on minoritized groups. This workshop sits with that contradiction.
- 01
Accountability still matters.
Disclosure can clarify provenance, ownership, consent, and public trust.
- 02
But disclosure is not neutral.
Revealing AI use can penalize the user — diligence read as cheating, accommodation read as competence loss, ideation read as authorship.
- 03
So refusal belongs in the design space.
Equitable policy needs context, power analysis, and protection from unnecessary exposure — especially for users who already carry disproportionate stigma.
We move beyond asking “should people disclose AI?”
Instead, our aim is to build a richer understanding of
- Who is affected by disclosure?
- Which needs, constraints, and rights do we need to pay attention to, and what tensions exist between them?
- And how can we design future disclosure to best navigate these tensions?
This is where it lands.
Six everyday scenarios. Four lenses you can bring to them. Pick a lens — every scenario shifts under it.
Where the social cost lands.
Two hours, together.
Two participatory activities — Power Mapping and the Disclosure Design Fiction Studio — bookended by a framing talk and a share-out. Groups of 5–6, mixed digital and paper-pen artifacts.
- 20 min · step 01
Framing the landscape
A local invited researcher sets up disclosure mandates, norms, and emerging evidence of harm.
- 45 min · step 02
Power Mapping
Groups take stakeholder roles, write Future Headlines, then map needs, constraints, and asymmetries.
- 45 min · step 03
Disclosure Design Fiction Studio
Groups sketch or vibe-code a 2029 artifact plus a Context Card naming benefits, mitigated costs, and remaining harms.
- 10 min · step 04
Share-out
Artifacts and Context Cards become source material for a public equitable-disclosure toolkit.
Strategies to identify and mitigate disclosure harms
Domain-specific tactics for spotting where disclosure benefits some while harming others, especially minoritized groups.
Design artifacts and Context Cards
Tangible prototypes — sketched, drawn, or vibe-coded — paired with sociotechnical accountability notes.
A public toolkit
Organizers will synthesize outcomes into a toolkit of considerations, templates, and examples shared back to participants and the public.
The team behind this.
Seven researchers and practitioners across two companies and five academic institutions, working at the intersection of design, philosophy, history, and ethics of AI.
Finola Finn
Postdoctoral ResearcherUniversity of LuxembourgEsch-sur-Alzette, LuxembourgresearchesAI in historical and creative practice
Angel Hsing-Chi Hwang
Assistant ProfessorUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos Angeles, USAresearchesHuman–AI interaction
Donal Khosrowi
Postdoctoral ResearcherLeibniz University Hannover (CELLS)Hanover, GermanyresearchesEthics of AI and AI-in-science
Seyun Kim
PhD CandidateCarnegie Mellon University, HCIIPittsburgh, USAresearchesHuman–AI interaction in high-stakes decision-making
Morgan Klaus Scheuerman
Research ScientistSony AIBarcelona, SpainresearchesGenerative AI in creative industries
Harry Ye
PhD StudentUniversity of TorontoToronto, CanadaresearchesCritical Engagement with AI, Educational Technology
