The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2573
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T07:55:45.146034Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: policy
headline: Conversational-agent-mediated public encounters: an analysis of citizen communication in public service delivery
dek: Purpose Conversational agents are often used in public organizations as an entry-level application of artificial intelligence and constitute a form of digitally mediated public encounter. However, little is known about how citizens communicate in conversational-agent-mediated public service interactions. By analyzing conversations between citizens and a conversational agent, this article formulates three propositions that contribute to understanding the communicative dynamics of such encounters. Design/methodolo…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: In a qualitative study of 73 participants filling in a fictitious tax return, a GPT-based conversational agent occasionally gave incorrect but plausible answers, even though the researchers tried to prevent it.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: In a qualitative study of 73 participants filling in a fictitious tax return, a GPT-based conversational agent occasionally gave incorrect but plausible answers, even though the researchers tried to prevent it.
problem_evidence: in rare cases, the conversational agent provided incorrect but plausible answers (hallucination)
quick_read: A qualitative study analysed conversations between 73 participants and a GPT-based conversational agent that helped them fill in a fictitious tax return. The study found that the agent occasionally gave incorrect but plausible answers, known as hallucinations, despite efforts to avoid them.

The findings matter because conversational agents are often an entry-level use of artificial intelligence in public organizations, and they form a digitally mediated encounter between citizens and the state. The authors describe vulnerabilities that arise from the agent's role as an information intermediary.

Citizens in the experiment asked simple, concise questions and did not use elaborate prompt engineering. They also expected the agent to know a lot about the topic, which raises the stakes when it is wrong. The study used a fictitious tax return, so real-world consequences were not measured.
limitation: The study analysed a fictitious tax return in an experiment with 73 participants, and the hallucinations were reported as rare, so the findings may not reflect real filings or real public-service use.
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: The experiment had 73 participants who filled in a fictitious tax return with help from a GPT-based conversational agent. | Researchers analysed the conversation logs qualitatively and drew three propositions about how citizens communicate with such agents. | Citizens communicated in a highly task-oriented way, using simple and concise questions rather than elaborate prompt engineering. | Participants expected the agent to have a lot of knowledge about the topic in question. | In rare cases the agent gave incorrect but plausible answers (hallucination), even though this was tried to be avoided. | The authors describe the study as among the first to analyse conversation log data from citizen interactions with a GPT-based agent in a public-service setting.
rundown: The data came from an experiment in which participants had to fill in a fictitious tax return while assisted by a GPT-based conversational agent. The researchers analysed the resulting conversations qualitatively, with 73 participants (N = 73).

From the logs they formulated three propositions about conversational-agent-mediated public encounters: strong expectations about information provision, limited engagement with prompting strategies, and vulnerabilities arising from the agent's role as an information intermediary.

Participants sought answers through short, direct questions instead of crafting elaborate prompts. The agent was expected to be knowledgeable about the topic, while in rare cases it produced answers that were wrong yet plausible.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | International Journal of Public Sector Management | https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-06-2025-0236 | 2026-09-03
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

98662178bf0e9e4fc330228f81a93ea8521f640bb9d8e57783000205433fa141

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000