1. Propose a challenge
Do you have a challenge you are facing at the intersection of persuasion and technology? Share it with us and we will scope it together.
RESEARCH CHALLENGE TEAMS
Dedicated teams tackling your challenge at the intersection of persuasion and technology.
Do you have a challenge you are facing at the intersection of persuasion and technology?
We can help.
What our challenge teams do
Every year the Coalition convenes international working groups that respond directly to challenges proposed by international partner organizations. The focus is twofold: how AI persuades human behavior, and how to respond to urgent contingencies in algorithmic persuasion as they emerge.
Research teams span more than twenty global institutions, pairing rhetoricians with computer scientists, linguists, engineers, artists, marketing researchers, policy researchers, ethicists, economists, political scientists, and philosophers. When a partner brings a specific challenge, we convene a dedicated team around it.
Join a Team- 20+
- Global institutions on challenge teams
- 8
- Research Challenges — proposed by international partner organizations
- 60+
- Researchers for the 2026–2027 Challenges
- Current Challenge Partners
- Center for Humane Technology
Institute for Humane Robotics
Transresearch Consortium
How a challenge team works
2. We convene a dedicated team
The Coalition forms a dedicated research team for your issue, pairing rhetoricians with computer scientists, linguists, engineers, artists, marketing researchers, policy researchers, ethicists, economists, political scientists, and philosophers.
3. You receive actionable deliverables
The team delivers findings you can act on — principles, frameworks, guardrail criteria, and practical guidance in the tradition of the Persuasion Principles for AI Safety.
Who serves on the teams
Challenge teams are deliberately multidisciplinary — each one pairs rhetoric and persuasion scholars with the disciplines that build, study, and govern persuasive systems.
- Rhetoricians
- Computer scientists
- Linguists
- Engineers
- Artists
- Marketing researchers
- Policy researchers
- Ethicists
- Economists
- Political scientists
- Philosophers
Current Challenge Teams
Eight research challenge teams are at work across the Coalition for the 2026–2027 cycle, bringing together sixty-three researchers and scholars from institutions worldwide.
Research Challenge 1
Center for Humane Technology
What core narratives have emerged in the advertising campaigns many AI developers have launched to present a vision for our future?
Emmanuella Afimaa
University of Minnesota
Sam Allen
Randolph-Macon College
Collin Bjork
Massey University, University of New Zealand
Anne Burkhardt
University of Tubingen
Ryan Cheek
Missouri University of Science and Technology
Isidore Dorpenyo
University of Minnesota
Kaitlyn Haynal
University of Mary Washington
Melanie Mika
University of Tubingen
Patrick Rhamey
Virginia Military Institute
Deniz Sarikaya
Universität zu Lübeck
Blue Tarpalechee
Stanford University
Research Challenge 2
Center for Humane Technology
How should “memory” and user info be safely and appropriately used by AI chatbots?
Rodolpho “Rudy” Barrett
James Madison University
Johanna Hartelius
University of Texas at Austin
Jialei Jiang
University of Pittsburgh
Brad Lucas
Texas Christian University
Shalina Prakash
Georgia Institute of Technology
Roger Thompson
Arizona State University
Research Challenge 3
Center for Humane Technology
Sometimes the most appropriate response for an AI model is “no.” In what contexts should models terminate chats? How do we incentivize companies to promote important boundary setting?
Becca Darr
Big Acts
Laura Dumin
University of Central Oklahoma
Erica Leigh
SUNY New Paltz
Archana Mannem
University of Delaware
Syed Ali Mehdi Rizvi
University of Bonn
Roger Thompson
Arizona State University
Umair Usman
Florida International University
Research Challenge 4
Center for Humane Technology
Should the right of publicity expand from protecting celebrities’ commercial interests to protecting everyone’s control over their monetizable identity in an era when AI makes anyone’s likeness, data, and behavioral patterns economically valuable?
Ronald Clark
Northwestern University
Crystal Colombini
Fordham University
Uma Karmarkar
University of California, San Diego
Jenny Liang
Northwestern University
Meghan Velez
University of Central Florida
Research Challenge 5
RhetAI Coalition
Which constitutive parts of rhetorical theory are necessary to develop an AI informed by principles of ethical rhetoric? What would such an AI look like?
Jack-Lucas Chang
University of California, Berkeley
John David
Virginia Military Institute
Carleigh Davis
21CS
Scott Graham
University of Texas at Austin
Jacob Green
Arizona State University
Jon Lund
Idaho
Zoltan Majdik
North Dakota State University
Jonathan McMichael
Arizona State University
Kris Willis
Packback
Research Challenge 6
RhetAI Coalition
Develop a stress test for “rhetorical AI literacy” (Gottschling).
Amy Anderson
WCU
Katherine Broyles
APUS
Cynthia Davidson
Stony Brook University
Fabian Erhardt
University of Tubingen
Thomas Girshin
California State University, San Bernardino
Markus Gottschling
University of Tubingen
Alexis Hart
Allegheny College
Steve Mailloux
Loyola St. Marymount
Parysa Mostajir
Tammy Oltz
Mitchell Hamline School of Law
Rafaela Pfeil
University of Tubingen
Sarah Ruffing Robbins
Texas Christian University
Jennifer M. Santos
Grand Canyon University
Joshua Watson
Brightpoint Community College
Lydia Wilkes
Auburn University
Research Challenge 7
Transresearch Consortium
How do we incorporate measures of AI capabilities into existing assessments of state strength, both in terms of domestic political capacity to accomplish policy goals as well as international capabilities?
Mark Abdollahian
Claremont Graduate University / ACERTAS
Gaspare Genna
University of Texas at El Paso
Zhamilia Klycheva
ACERTAS
Patrick Rhamey
Virginia Military Institute
Birol Yeşilada
Portland State University
Yuzhu Zeng
La Sierra University
Research Challenge 8
Institute for Humane Robotics
How persuasion and manipulation tactics change when the system has a body.
Anthropomorphic design as persuasive architecture (applies rhetorical frameworks to expressivity and responsiveness in robots).
David Gunkel
Northern Illinois University
Kamil Mamak
Jagiellonian University
Roger Thompson
Arizona State University
Ivano Zanzarella
University of Heidelberg
Challenge Team Archive
Browse past research challenge teams — their challenge questions and rosters — from previous challenge cycles.
Visit the Challenge Team ArchiveBring us your challenge
Inquiries are open for the 2026–2027 challenge teams. Tell us about the challenge at the intersection of persuasion and technology that your organization is facing, and we will convene the team to tackle it.