skip to main content
10.1145/2858036.2858288acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

"Like Having a Really Bad PA": The Gulf between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents

Published:07 May 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

The past four years have seen the rise of conversational agents (CAs) in everyday life. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Facebook have all embedded proprietary CAs within their software and, increasingly, conversation is becoming a key mode of human-computer interaction. Whilst we have long been familiar with the notion of computers that speak, the investigative concern within HCI has been upon multimodality rather than dialogue alone, and there is no sense of how such interfaces are used in everyday life. This paper reports the findings of interviews with 14 users of CAs in an effort to understand the current interactional factors affecting everyday use. We find user expectations dramatically out of step with the operation of the systems, particularly in terms of known machine intelligence, system capability and goals. Using Norman's 'gulfs of execution and evaluation' [30] we consider the implications of these findings for the design of future systems.

References

  1. ALICE http://www.alicebot.org/bios/richardwallace.html Artificial Intelligence FoundationGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jennifer Attride-Stirling. 2001. Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385-405Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Margaret A Boden. 2007. Conversationalists and Confidants. In Proceedings of Artificial Companions in Society: Perspectives on the Present and Future. Oxford Internet Institute. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/2669520/Artificial_Companions_in_Society_Perspectives_on_the_Present_and_FutureGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Richard, A Bolt. 1980. "Put-That-There": Voice and Gesture at the Graphics Interface, In the proceedings of SIGGRAGH '80 Proceedings, 14, 3 (July 1980), 262270. doi: 10.1145/800250.807503 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Timothy Bickmore and Rosalind W Picard. 2005. Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 12, 2: 293--327. doi: 10.1145/1067860.1067867 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Susan Brennan. 1990. Conversation as direct manipulation: An iconoclastic view. In The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. B.K. Laurel (Ed.), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Alan Bryman. 2004. Social Research Methods (2nd Ed). NY: Oxford University PressGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Justine Cassell. 2001. Embodied Conversational Agent: Representation and Intelligence in User Interfaces. AI Magazine. 22, 4: 67--83. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v22i4.1593 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Justine Cassell. Tim Bickmore, Lee Campbell, Hannes Vihjalmsson & Hao Yan. 2000. Human Conversation as a System Framework: Designing Embodied Conversational Agents. In Embodied Conversational Agents. Justine Cassell. (ed) MIT Press: 29--63 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Martin Davis. 2000. Engines of Logic: Mathematicians and the Origin of the Computer. W W Norton & Company Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Anind Dey and Jennifer Mankoff. 2005. Designing mediation for context-aware applications. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 12, 1: 53--80. doi 10.1145/1057237.1057241 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Abbe Don, Susan Brennen., Brenda Laurel and Ben Shneiderman. 1992 Anthropomorphism: from Eliza to Terminator 2. Panel In Proc. CHI '92, Bauersfeld, P., Bennett, J., and Lynch, G. (eds.). ACM, 67--70 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jilian D'Onfro. 2015. Microsoft Created a Chatbot in China that has Millions of Loyal Followers who talk to it like in the Movie 'Her'. Business Insider UK. http://uk.businessinsider.com/microsoft-chatbotxiaoice-2015-8?r=US&IR=TGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Mauro Dragone, Thomas Holz, Brian R. Duffy, Greogory M.P. O'Hare. 2005. Social Situated Agents in Virtual, Real and Mixed Reality Environments. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Themis Panayiotopoulos, Jonathan Gratch, Ruth Aylett, Daniel Ballin, Patrick Olivier & Thomas Rist (Eds.) Proceedings of 5th International Working Conference, IVA 2005 Kos, Greece, September 12--14, 2005. Springer: 166--177. doi: 10.1007/11550617_15 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. James R. Glass, 1999. Challenges for Spoken Dialogue Systems. In the proceedings of IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding. (ASRU), CO, USAGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Erving Goffman. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. PathenonGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Aurthur Graesser, Haiying Li & Carol Forsyth. 2014. Learning by Communicating in Natural Language with Conversational Agents. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 23, 5: 374--380 doi: 10.1177/0963721414540680Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Greg Guest, Arwen Bunce & Laura Johnson. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18, 1: 59--82. doi: 10.1177/1525822X05279903Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Joakim Gustafson, Johan Boye, Morgan Fredriksson, Lasse Johanneson, Jürgen Königsmann. 2005. Providing Computer Game Characters with Conversational Abilities. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Themis Panayiotopoulos, Jonathan Gratch, Ruth Aylett, Daniel Ballin, Patrick Olivier & Thomas Rist (Eds.) Proceedings of 5th International Working Conference, IVA 2005 Kos, Greece, September 12--14, 2005. Springer: 37--51 doi: 10.1007/11550617_4 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Jürgen Habermas. 1998. On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Richard H. R. Harper. 2010. Texture: Human Expression in the Age of Communications Overload. MIT Press Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Kerstin Heuwinkel. 2012. Framing the Invisible - The Social Background of Trust. In Your Virtual Butler: The Making-of. Robert Trappl (ed). Springer, 16--26. doi: 10.1007/978--3--642--37346--6_3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ido A. Iurgel & Manuel Ziegler. 2005. Ask & Answer: An Educational Game Where It Pays to Endear Your Capricious Virtual Companion. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Themis Panayiotopoulos, Jonathan Gratch, Ruth Aylett, Daniel Ballin, Patrick Olivier & Thomas Rist (Eds.) Proceedings of 5th International Working Conference, IVA 2005 Kos, Greece, September 12--14, 2005. Springer: 15--24 doi: 10.1007/11550617_2 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Stephan Kopp, Lars Gesellensetter, Nicole, C. Krämer & Ipke Wachsmuth. 2005. A Conversational Agent as Museum Guide: Design and Evaluation of a RealWorld Application. Intelligent Virtual Agents. 3661: 329--343 doi: 10.1007/11550617_28 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Joseph Carl Robnett Licklider. Man-Computer Symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-1,(March, 1960), 4--11Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Paul P. Maglio and Christopher S. Campbell. 2003. Attentive agents. Communications of the ACM 46, 3: 47--51 doi: 10.1145/636772.636797 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Cade Metz. 2015. Get a Peek at Using Facebook's New Assistant, 'M'. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2015/09/get-peek-someoneusing-facebooks-new-assistant-m/ (accessed 07.09.15)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Roger Moore. 2012. Spoken Language Processing: Where do we go from Here? In Your Virtual Butler: The Making-of. Robert Trappl (ed). Springer, 119--133 doi: 10.1007/978--3--642--37346--6_10 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Andreea I Niculescu, Kheng Hui Yeo, Luis F D'Haro, Seokhwan Kim, Ridong Jiang & Rafael E Banchs. 2014. Design and evaluation of a conversational agent for the touristic domain. In Proceedings of APSIPA'14: 1-10. doi:10.1109/APSIPA.2014.7041744Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Don Norman. 2013. The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Kenton O'Hara, Richard Harper, Helena Mentis. Abigail Sellen and Alex Taylor. 2013. On the naturalness of touchless: putting the "interaction" back into NUI. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction. 20, 1 doi: 10.1145/2442106.2442111 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Sabine Payr. 2012. Virtual Butlers and Real People: Styles and Practices in Long Term Use of a Companion. In Your Virtual Butler: The Making-of. Robert Trappl (ed). Springer, 134--178 doi: 10.1007/978--3--642--37346--6_11 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Jenny Preece, Yvonne Rogers & Helen Sharp. 2015. Interaction Design: Beyond Huma- Computer Interaction. Wiley & Sons LtdGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Stephen Pulman. Johan Boye, Marc Cavazza, Cameron Smith & Raúl Santos de la Cámara. 2010. How was your Day? In Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on Companionable Dialogue Systems. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA: 37- Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Byron Reeves & Clifford Nass. 1996. The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. NY: Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Deborah Richards. 2012. Agent-based museum and tour guides: applying the state of the art. In Proceedings of The 8th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment: Playing the System (IE '12). ACM (2012) doi: 10.1145/2336727.2336742 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Lina Maria Rojas-Barahona and Christophe Cerisara. 2014. Bayesian Inverse Reinforcement Learning for Modelling Conversational Agents in a Virtual Environment. Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. 8403: 503--514 doi: 10.1007/978--3--642--54906--9_41Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Nicole Shechtman, and Leonard M Horowitz. 2003 Media Inequality in Conversation: How People Behave Differently when Interacting with Computers and People. In Proceedings of the. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '03). ACM, (2003), 281--288 doi: 10.1145/642659.642661 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Nathan Shedroff & Christopher Noessel. 2012. Make it so: Interaction Design Lessons from Science Fiction. Brooklyn, NY: RosenfeldGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Stergios Tegos, Stavros Demetriadis, Thrasyvoulos Tsiatsos. 2012. Using a Conversational Agent for Promoting Collaborative Language Learning. In Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Intelligent Networking and Collaborative Systems: 162--165 doi: 10.1109/iNCoS.2012.105 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Janienke Sturm, Else den Os, Lou Boves. 1999. Issues in Spoken Dialogue Systems: Experiences with the Dutch ARISE System. In the proceedings of ESCA Workshop on Interactive Dialogue in Multi-Modal Systems (UDS-99), Kolster Irsee, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Robert Trappl. 2012. From Jeeves Jeannie to Siri, and Then? In Your Virtual Butler: The Making-of. Robert Trappl (ed). Springer, 1--8 doi: 10.1007/978--3--64237346--6_1 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Giorgio Vassallo, Giovanni Pilato, Agnese Augello & Salvatore Gaglio. 2010. Phrase Coherence in Conceptual Spaces for Conversational Agents. In Semantic Computing. Sheu, Yu, Ramamoorthy, Joshi & Zadeh.(eds). IEEE: 357--371 doi: 10.1002/9780470588222.ch18Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Astrid M. Von der Pütten, Nicloe C. Krämer, Jonathan Gratch & Sin-Hwa Kang. 2010. "It doesn't matter what you are!" Explaining Social Effects of Agents and Avatars. In Computers in Human Behaviour, 26: 16411650 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.012 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Joseph Weizenbaum. 1976. Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgement to Calculation. W. H. Freeman Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Joseph Weizenbaum. 1965. Eliza: A Computer Program for the Study of Natural Language Communication between Man and Machine. In Communications of the ACM. 9,1:36--45 doi: 10.1145/365153.365168 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Yorick Wilks. 2010. Is a companion a distinctive kind of relationship with a machine?. In Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on Companionable Dialogue Systems (CDS '10). Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 13--18 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Yorick Wilks (ed.). 2010. Close Engagements with Artificial Companions. Key social, psychological, ethical and design issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. "Like Having a Really Bad PA": The Gulf between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2016
      6108 pages
      ISBN:9781450333627
      DOI:10.1145/2858036

      Copyright © 2016 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 May 2016

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate565of2,435submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader