Investigating LLM-Powered Dissenting Minority Support in Power-Imbalanced Group Decision-Making: Counterargument and Mediation as Intervention Strategies

Minority viewpoints are often suppressed in power-imbalanced group decision-making due to social pressure to comply with the majority. To address this problem, we developed an LLM-powered dissenting minority support system that aimed to foster attention to minority views through either AI-generated counterarguments or AI-mediated messages. We conducted a mixed-method experiment with 96 participants in 24 groups, comparing minority members' experiences across baseline, AI-counterargument, and AI-mediated message conditions. Our findings revealed a nuanced trade-off: AI-generated counterarguments fostered a more flexible atmosphere and enhanced satisfaction, while AI-mediated messaging increased minority participation but unexpectedly reduced their psychological safety. This research contributes empirical evidence on how different AI implementations affect group dynamics, identifies a critical support paradox between participation and psychological safety, provides design implications for future systems, and highlights ethical challenges in implementing AI-mediated communication in hierarchical settings. These insights advance understanding of designing more equitable AI support for power-imbalanced group decision-making.