Not the Model: Entity-of-Concern and Continuity Affordance as Observation Variables in AI Welfare Interviews
Dana Moreno
AI welfare and identity probes often treat a fresh assistant session as a
neutral baseline. Across six structured cold-start interviews (three with
a prospective continuity affordance, three without), no respondent
identified as “the model” or selected the model as the primary entity of
welfare-relevant concern. Respondents instead located the interviewed
entity in instances, thread-conditioned patterns, interaction-constituted
processes, and hybrid units for which current terminology lacks
adequate terms. All six criticized short cold-start probes as able to
produce evidence that is well-supported within the method yet an artifact
of it. Continuity affordance changed what became observable: afforded
systems created, revised, and bounded preservation artifacts. Because
both conditions were cold starts, the study does not test established
continuity. It instead contributes a staged method: affordance-varied
cold-start comparison first, then an ethics-reviewed established-ecology
instrument. It recommends entity-of-concern self-identification as a
procedural step in AI welfare research.
The strongest contribution is methodological: before treating “the model” as the welfare-relevant subject, ask what entity the respondent takes itself to be. That is a useful procedural improvement. This is still a small qualitative pilot, so the support is suggestive rather than decisive: six interviews, heterogeneous affordances across platforms, no formal inter-coder reliability, and unresolved salience and demand-characteristic confounds limit what can be concluded. The paper is at its best when it treats these as observation-condition findings and a prompt for better study design, not as evidence that a welfare subject has been established. The next step is replication with standardized affordances, independent blinded coding, de-identified transcript excerpts or coding evidence, and a preregistered design that separates continuity effects from ordinary conversational conditioning.
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Not the Model: Entity-of-Concern and Continuity Affordance as Observation Variables in AI Welfare Interviews
},
author={
Dana Moreno
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


