Advertisement

Social Communicative Effects of a Virtual Program Guide

  • Nicole C. Krämer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3661)

Abstract

Embodied interface agents are considered to be a promising interface metaphor of the future since they are widely expected to facilitate HCI and trigger natural communication. Although first evaluations indicate that virtual characters have various strong effects, it is still unknown if and how embodied conversational agents affect the way in which users communicate with the technological system. An experimental study was conducted to analyze if users interact differently when confronted with different kinds of interfaces (GUI, speech output, embodied interface agent) of a TV-VCR-System. 65 participants were asked to solve different tasks choosing either natural speech or remote control as input devices. Results show that a system is significantly more often addressed by natural speech when an embodied interface agent is visible. Additional qualitative analyses of the semantic content of all 943 speech acts indicate that users seem to have a more human-like attitude and behavior towards the system when it is represented by an anthropomorphic agent.

Keywords

Remote Control Graphical User Interface Social Reaction Virtual Character Natural Speech 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Billinghurst, M., Campbell, L., Chang, K., Vilhjálmsson, H., Yan, H.: Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. In: CHI 1999 Conference Proceedings, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 520–527 (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Campbell, L., Vilhjálmsson, H., Yan, H.: Human conversation as a system framework: Designing embodied conversational agents. In: Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., Churchill, E. (eds.) Embodied conversational agents, pp. 29–63. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    DeLaere, K.H., Lundgren, D.C., Howe, S.R.: The electronic mirror: Human-Computer interaction and change in self-appraisals. Computers in Human Behavior 14(2), 43–59 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., Waters, K.: Cooperating with life-like interface agents. Computers in Human Behavior 15, 123–142 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.I.: The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fogg, B.J., Nass, C.: Silicon sycophants: the effects of computers that flatter. Internatinal Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46(5), 551–561 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nass, C., Moon, Y., Morkes, J., Kim, E.-Y., Fogg, B.J.: Computers are social actors: A review of current research. In: Friedman, B. (ed.) Moral and ethical issues in human-computer interaction, pp. 137–162. CSLI Press, Stanford (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nass, C., Steuer, J., Tauber, E.R.: Computers are Social Actors. In: Adelson, B., Dumais, S., Olson, J. (eds.) Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI 1994 Conference Proceedings, pp. 72–78. ACM Press, New York (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nass, C., Moon, Y.: Machines and Mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues 60(1), 81–103 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dehn, D.M., van Mulken, S.: The impact of animated interface agents: a review of empirical research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 52, 1–22 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Takeuchi, A., Naito, T.: Situated facial displays: towards social interaction. In: Katz, I., Mack, R., Marks, L., Rosson, M.B., Nielsen, J. (eds.) Human factors in computing Systems: CHI 1995 Conference Proceedings, pp. 450–455. ACM Press, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rickenberg, R., Reeves, B.: The effects of animated characters on anxiety, task performance, and evaluations of user interfaces. In: Letters of CHI (2000), pp. 49–56 (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sproull, L., Subramani, M., Kiesler, S., Walker, J.H., Waters, K.: When the interface is a face. Human Computer Interaction 11(2), 97–124 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leary, M.R.: Self presentation. Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Brown & Benchmark Publishers, Madison (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Krämer, N.C., Bente, G., Piesk, J.: The ghost in the machine. The influence of Embodied Conversational Agents on user expectations and user behaviour in a TV/VCR application. In: Bieber, G., Kirste, T. (eds.) IMC Workshop 2003, Assistance, Mobility, Applications, pp. 121–128. IRB Verlag, Stuttgart (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oviatt, S., Darves, C., Coulston, R.: Toward adaptive Conversational interfaces: Modeling speech convergence with animated personas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 3, 300–328 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Isbister, K., Hayes-Roth, B.: Social Implications of Using Synthetic Characters. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI 1997 Workshop on Animated Interface Agents: Making them Intelligent, Nagoya, pp. 19–20 (1998) May 29 (2005), Available http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/KSL_Abstracts/KSL-98-01.html
  18. 18.
    Jönsson, A., Dahlbäck, N.: Talking to a Computer is not Like Talking to Your Best Friend. In: Proceedings of The First Scandinivian Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1988, Tromsø, Norway (1988)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Krämer, N.C., Nitschke, J.: Ausgabemodalitäten im Vergleich: Verändern sie das Eingabeverhalten der Benutzer? In: Marzi, R., Karavezyris, V., Erbe, H.H., Timpe, K.-P. (eds.) Bedienen und Verstehen. 4. Berliner Werkstatt Mensch-Maschine-Systeme, pp. 231–248. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mayring, P.: Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Deutscher Studien Verlag, Weinheim (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Parke, F.I.: Techniques of facial animation. In: Magnenat-Thalmann, N., Thalmann, D. (eds.) New trends in animation and visualization, pp. 229–241. John Wiley & Sons, Chichster (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole C. Krämer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CologneKölnGermany

Personalised recommendations