Timothy W. Bickmore
Rosalind W. Picard
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
This research investigates the meaning of “human-computer relationship” and presents techniques for constructing, maintaining, and evaluating such relationships, based on research in social psychology, sociolinguistics, communication and other social sciences. Contexts in which relationships are particularly important are described, together with specific benefits (like trust) and task outcomes (like improved learning) known to be associated with relationship quality. We especially consider the problem of designing for long-term interaction, and define relational agents as computational artifacts designed to establish and maintain long-term social-emotional relationships with their users. We construct the first such agent, and evaluate it in a controlled experiment with 101 users who were asked to interact daily with an exercise adoption system for a month. Compared to an equivalent task-oriented agent without any deliberate social-emotional or relationship-building skills, the relational agent was respected more, liked more, and trusted more, even after four weeks of interaction. Additionally, users expressed a significantly greater desire to continue working with the relational agent after the termination of the study. We conclude by discussing future directions for this research together with ethical and other ramifications of this work for HCI designers.
- Altman, I. and Taylor, D. 1973. Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. Holt, Rinhart & Winston, New York.Google Scholar
- Anselmi, K., James, J., and Zemanek, E. 1997. Relationship selling: How personal characteristics of salespeople affect buyer satisfaction. J. Soc. Behav. Person. 12, 2, 539--550.Google Scholar
- Argyle, M. 1988. Bodily Communication. Methuen & Co. Ltd, New York.Google Scholar
- Bachelor, A. 1991. Comparison and relationship to outcome of diverse dimensions of the helping alliance as seen by client and therapist. Psychotherapy 28, 4, 534--549.Google Scholar
- Berscheid, E. and Reis, H. 1998. Attraction and close relationships. The Handbook of Social Psychology. D. Gilbert, S. Fiske and G. Lindzey, Eds. McGraw-Hill, New York, 193--281.Google Scholar
- Bickmore, T. 2002. Towards the design of multimodal interfaces for handheld conversational characters. In Proceedings of the CHI'02 (Minneapolis, MN). Google Scholar
- Bickmore, T. and Cassell, J. 2001. Relational agents: A model and implementation of building user trust. In Proceedings of the CHI'01 (Seattle, WA). Google Scholar
- Breazeal, C. 2002. Designing Sociable Robots. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- Brehm, S. 1992. Intimate Relationships. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
- Brown, R. and Gilman, A. 1972. The pronouns of power and solidarity. Language and Social Context. P. Giglioli. Penguin, Harmondsworth, 252--282.Google Scholar
- Brown, P. and Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Burgoon, J. K. and Hale, J. L. 1984. The fundamental topoi of relational communication. Commun. Monogr. 51, 193--214.Google Scholar
- Cassell, J. and Bickmore, T. 2000. External manifestations of trustworthiness in the interface. Commun. ACM 43, 12, 50--56. Google Scholar
- Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Billinghurst, M., Campbell, L., Chang, K., Vilhjalmsson, H., and Yan, H. 1999. Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. In Proceedings of CHI'99. (Pittsburgh, PA). Google Scholar
- Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Vilhjálmsson, H., and Yan, H. 2000a. More than just a pretty face: Affordances of embodiment. In Proceedings of the IUI 2000 (New Orleans, LA). Google Scholar
- Cassell, J., Nakano, Y., Bickmore, T., Sidner, C., and Rich, C. 2001a. Non-verbal cues for discourse structure. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Toulouse, France). Google Scholar
- Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., and Churchill, E., Eds. 2000b. Embodied Conversational Agents. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- Cassell, J., Vilhjálmsson, H., and Bickmore, T. 2001b. BEAT: The behavior expression animation toolkit. In Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH '01 (Los Angeles, CA). Google Scholar
- Celio, A., Winzelberg, A., Dev, P., and Taylor, C. 2002. Improving compliance in on-line structured self-help programs: Evaluation of an eating disorder program. J. Psych. Pract. 8, 1, 14--20.Google Scholar
- Cole, T. and Bradac, J. 1996. A lay theory of relational satisfaction with best friends. J. Soc. Pers. Relation. 13, 1, 57--83.Google Scholar
- Connors, G., Carroll, K., DiClemente, C., and Longabaugh, R. 1997. The therapeutic alliance and its relationship to alchoholism treatment participation and outcome. J. Consult. Clin. Psych. 65, 4, 588--598.Google Scholar
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Rochberg-Halton, E. 1998. The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Dainton, M. and Stafford, L. 1993. Routine maintenance behaviors: A comparison of relationships type, partner similarity and sex differences. J. Soc. Pers. Relation. 10, 255--271.Google Scholar
- Damon, W. and Phelps, E. 1989. Strategic uses of peer learning in children's education. In Peer Relationships in Child Development. T. Berndt and G. Ladd, Ed. Wiley, New York, 135--157.Google Scholar
- Duck, S. 1991. Understanding Relationships. Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Duck, S. 1998. Human Relationships. SAGE Publications, London, England.Google Scholar
- Fogg, B. J. and Tseng, H. 1999. The elements of computer credibility. In Proceedings of CHI '99. Google Scholar
- Friedman, B., Kahn, P., and Hagman, J. 2003. Hardware companions? What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In Proceedings of CHI'03 (Ft. Lauderdale, FL). Google Scholar
- Gabarro, J. 1990. The development of working relationships. Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work. J. Galegher, R. Kraut and C. Egido, Eds. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., 79--110. Google Scholar
- Gaston, L. 1990. The concept of the alliance and its role in psychotherapy: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Psychotherapy 27, 2, 143--153.Google Scholar
- Gelso, C. and Hayes, J. 1998. The Psychotherapy Relationship: Theory, Research and Practice. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
- Gilbertson, J., Dindia, K., and Allen, M. 1998. Relational continuity constructional units and the maintenance of relationships. J. Soc. Pers. Relation. 15, 6, 774--790.Google Scholar
- Gill, D., Christensen, A., and Fincham, F. 1999. Predicting marital satisfaction from behavior: Do all roads really lead to Rome? Pers. Relation. 6, 369--387.Google Scholar
- Gutek, B., Cherry, B., Bhappu, A., Schneider, S., and Woolf, L. 2000. Features of service relationships and encounters. Work Occup. 27, 3, 319--352.Google Scholar
- Hartup, W. 1996. Cooperation, close relationships, and cognitive development. The company they keep: Friendship in childhood and adolescence. W. Bukowski, A. Newcomb and W. Hartup, Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 213--237.Google Scholar
- Henry, W. and Strupp, H. 1994. The therapeutic alliance as interpersonal process. In The Working Alliance: Theory, Research and Practice. A. Horvath and L. Greenberg, Eds. Wiley, New York, 51--84.Google Scholar
- Horvath, A. 1994. Research on the alliance. In The Working Alliance: Theory, Research and Practice. A. Horvath and L. Greenberg, Eds. Wiley, New York, 259--286.Google Scholar
- Horvath, A. and Greenberg, L. 1989. Development and validation of the working alliance inventory. J. Counse. Psych. 36, 2, 223--233.Google Scholar
- Horvath, A. and Luborsky, L. 1993. The role of the therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy. J. Consult. Clin. Psych. 61, 4, 561--573.Google Scholar
- Horvath, A. and Symonds, B. 1991. Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. J. Consel. Psych. 38, 2, 139--149.Google Scholar
- Jakobson, R. 1960. Linguistics and poetics. In Style in language. T. A. Sebeok, Ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 130--144.Google Scholar
- Keijsers, G. P. J., Schaap, C. P. D. R., and Hoogduin, C. A. L. 2000. The impact of interpersonal patient and therpist behavior on outcome in cognitive-behavior therapy. Behav. Modif. 24, 2, 264--297.Google Scholar
- Kelley, H. 1983. Epilogue: An essential science. In Close Relationships, Kelley, H., Berschedi, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J., Huston, T., Levinger, G., McClintock, E., Peplau, L., and Peterson, D., Eds. New York, 486--503.Google Scholar
- Kim, J. and Moon, J. Y. 1997. Emotional usability of customer interfaces: Focusing on cyberBanking systems interfaces. In Proceedings of CHI 97. Google Scholar
- Klein, J., Moon, Y., and Picard, R. 2002. This computer responds to user frustration: Theory, design, results, and implications. Interact. Comput. 14, 119--140.Google Scholar
- Knapp, D. 1988. Behavioral management techniques and exercise promotion. In Exercise Adherence: Its Impact on Public Health. R. Dishman, Ed. Human Kinetics Books, Champaign, IL, 203--235.Google Scholar
- LaFrance, M. 1982. Posture mirroring and rapport. In Interaction Rhythms: Periodicity in Communicative Behavior. M. Davis, Ed. Human Sciences Press, Inc., New York, 279--298.Google Scholar
- Laver, J. 1981. Linguistic routines and politeness in greeting and parting. In Conversational Routine. F. Coulmas, Ed. Mouton, The Hague, 289--304.Google Scholar
- Lee, J., Kim, J., and Moon, J. 2000. What makes internet users visit cyber stores again? Key design factors for customer loyalty. In Proceedings of CHI'00. Google Scholar
- Lester, J. C., Converse, S. A., Kahler, S. E., Barlow, S. T., Stone, B. A., and Bhogal, R. S. 1997. The persona effect: Affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of CHI '97. Google Scholar
- Levinson, S. C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Lim, T. 1994. Facework and interpersonal relationships. The challenge of facework: Cross-cultural and interpersonal issues. S. Ting-Toomey, Ed. State University of New York Press, Albany, N.Y., 209--229.Google Scholar
- Luborsky, L. 1994. Therapeutic alliances as predictors of psychotherapy outcomes: Factors explaining the predictice success. In The Working Alliance: Theory, Research and Practice. A. Horvath and L. Greenberg, Eds. Wiley, New York, 38--50.Google Scholar
- Maes, P. 1989. How to do the right thing. Conn. Sci. J. 1, 3.Google Scholar
- Malinowski, B. 1923. The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In The Meaning of Meaning. C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards, Eds. Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
- Mallinckrodt, B. 1993. Session impact, working alliance, and treatment outcome in brief counseling. J. Counsel. Psych. 40, 1, 25--32.Google Scholar
- McGuire, A. 1994. Helping behaviors in the natural environment: Dimensions and correlates of helping. Personal. Soc. Psych. Bull. 20, 1, 45--56.Google Scholar
- McNeill, D. 1992. Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- Miller, C. and Larson, R. 1992. An explanatory and “argumentative” interface for a model-based diagnostic system. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Monterey, CA). ACM, New York. Google Scholar
- Moon, Y. 1998. Intimate self-disclosure exchanges: Using computers to build reciprocal relationships with consumers. Harvard Business School, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Morkes, J., Kernal, H., and Nass, C. 1998. Humor in task-oriented computer-mediated communication and human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of CHI 98. Google Scholar
- Okun, B. 1997. Effective Helping: Interviewing and Counseling Techniques. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove, CA.Google Scholar
- Pate, R. R., Pratt, M., Blair, S. N., Haskell, W. L., Macera, C. A., Bouchard, C., Buchner, D., Ettinger, W., Heath, G. W., King, A. C., Kriska, A., Leon, A. S., Marcus, B. H., Morris, J., Paffenbarger, R. S., Patrick, K., Pollock, M. L., Rippe, J. M., Sallis, J., and Wilmore, J. H. 1995. Physical activity and public health: A Recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American College of Sports Medicine. J. AMA 273, 5, 402--407.Google Scholar
- Petty, R. and Wegener, D. 1998. Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In The Handbook of Social Psychology. D. Gilbert, S. Fiske and G. Lindzey, Eds. McGraw-Hill, New York, 323--390.Google Scholar
- Picard, R. 1997. Affective Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
- Picard, R. and Klein, J. 2002. Computers that recognize and respond to user emotion: theoretical and practical implications. Interact. Comput. 14, 141--169.Google Scholar
- Pinto, B., Cherico, N., Szymanski, L., and Marcus, B. 1998. Longitudinal changes in college students' exercise participation. College Health 47, 23--27.Google Scholar
- Planalp, S. 1993. Friends' and acquaintances' conversations II: Coded differences. J. Soc. Pers. Relation. 10, 339--354.Google Scholar
- Planalp, S. and Benson, A. 1992. Friends' and acquaintances' conversations I: Perceived differences. J. Soc. Pers. Relations. 9, 483--506.Google Scholar
- Prochaska, J. and Marcus, B. 1994. The transtheoretical model: Applications to exercise. In Advances in Exercise Adherence. R. Dishman, Ed. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, 161--180.Google Scholar
- Raue, P. and Goldfried, M. 1994. The therapeutic alliance in cognitive-behavior therapy. In The Working Alliance: Theory, Research and Practice. A. Horvath and L. Greenberg, Ed. Wiley, New York, 131--152.Google Scholar
- Reeves, B. and Nass, C. 1996. The Media Equation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Relationship. 1998. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, MICRA.Google Scholar
- Relationship. 2000. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
- Rich, C., Sidner, C. L., and Lesh, N. 2001. COLLAGEN: Applying collaborative discourse theory to human-computer interaction. AI Magazine. Google Scholar
- Richmond, V. and McCroskey, J. 1995. Immediacy. In Nonverbal Behavior in Interpersonal Relations. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA, 195--217.Google Scholar
- Riva, A., Smigelski, C., and Friedman, R. 2000. WebDietAID: An interactive web-based nutritional counselor. AMIA.Google Scholar
- Sallis, J. 1997. Seven-day physical activity recall. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise Supplement: S89--S103.Google Scholar
- Schneider, K. P. 1988. Small Talk: Analysing Phatic Discourse. Marburg, Hitzeroth.Google Scholar
- Shechtman, N. and Horowitz, L. 2003. Media inequality in conversation: How people behave differently when interacting with computers and people. In Proceedings of CHI'03 (Ft. Lauderdale, FL). Google Scholar
- Spencer-Oatey, H. 1996. Reconsidering power and distance. J. Prag. 26, 1--24.Google Scholar
- Stafford, L. and Canary, D. 1991. Maintenance strategies and romantic relationship type, gender and relational characteristics. J. Soc. Pers. Relation. 8, 217--242.Google Scholar
- Stafford, L., Dainton, M., and Haas, S. 2000. Measuring routine and strategic relational maintenance: Scale revision, sex versus gender roles, and the prediction of relational characteristics. Commun. Monographs 67, 3, 306--323.Google Scholar
- Stipek, D. 1996. Motivation and instruction. Handbook of Educational Psychology. Berliner and Calfee, 85--113.Google Scholar
- Sunde, M. and Sandra, S. 1999. Behavior Change in the Human Services: An Introduction to Principles and Applications. Sage, London, England.Google Scholar
- Suzuki, N., Takeuchi, Y., Ishii, K., and Okada, M. 2003. Effects of echoic mimicry using hummed sounds on human-computer interaction. Speech Commun. 40, 559--573. Google Scholar
- Svennevig, J. 1999. Getting Acquainted in Conversation. John Benjamins, Philadephia, PA.Google Scholar
- Torres, O. E., Cassell, J., and Prevost, S. 1997. Modeling gaze behavior as a function of discourse structure. In Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Human-Computer Conversation.Google Scholar
- Tseng, S. and Fogg, B. J. 1999. Credibility and computing technology. Commun. ACM 42, 5, 39--44. Google Scholar
- Tudor-Locke, C. and Myers, A. M. 2001. Methodological considerations for researchers and practitioners using pedometers to measure physical (ambulatory) activity. Res. Quart. Exer. Sport 72, 1, 1--12.Google Scholar
- Turkle, S. 1995. Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. Simon & Scuster, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Google Scholar
- van Mulken, S., Andre, E., and Muller, J. 1999. An Empirical Study on the Trustworthiness of Life-Like Interface Agents. DFKI, Saarbrucken, Germany. Google Scholar
- Velicer, W. and Prochaska, J. 1999. An expert system intervention for smoking cessation. Pat. Educat. Counsel. 36, 119--129.Google Scholar
- Walker, M. A., Cahn, J. E., and Whittaker, S. J. 1997. Improvising linguistic style: Social and affective bases for agent personality. In Proceedings of Autonomous Agents 97, Marina Del Rey, CA. Google Scholar
- Whittaker, S. and O'Conaill, B. 1997. The role of vision in face-to-face and mediated communication. Video-Mediated Communication. K. Finn, A. Sellen and S. Wilbur, Eds. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 23--49.Google Scholar
- Winnicott, D. 1982. Playing and Reality. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
- Wish, M., Deutsch, M., and Kaplan, S. J. 1976. Perceived dimensions of interpersonal relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 33, 4, 409--420.Google Scholar
- Woods, W. A. 1986. Transition network grammars for natural language analysis. In Readings in Natural Language Processing. B. J. Grosz, K. S. Jones and B. L. Webber, Eds. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc. Los Altos, CA, 71--88. Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships
Recommendations
Relational agents: a model and implementation of building user trust
CHI '01: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsBuilding trust with users is crucial in a wide range of applications, such as financial transactions, and some minimal degree of trust is required in all applications to even initiate and maintain an interaction with a user. Humans use a variety of ...
Modalities for building relationships with handheld computer agents
CHI EA '06: CHI '06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsIn this paper we describe the design of a relational agent interface for handheld computers and the results of a study exploring the effectiveness of different user-agent interaction modalities. Four different agent output modalities-text only, static ...
Posture, relationship, and discourse structure models of nonverbal behavior for long-term interaction
IVA'11: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Intelligent virtual agentsWe present an empirical investigation of nonverbal behavior in long-term interaction spanning multiple conversations, in the context of a developing interpersonal relationship. Based on a longitudinal video corpus of human-human counseling conversation, ...
Reviews
G. Smith
Bickmore and Picard investigate the meaning of "human-computer relationships," and present techniques for "constructing, maintaining, and evaluating such relationships." Their primary conclusion is that they "have motivated the development of relational agents as a new field of research." Two particular relational benefits motivate the authors' research: trust and task outcomes (like improved learning) known to be associated with relationship quality. The authors are concerned with evaluating whether agents "establish and maintain long-term social-emotional relationships with their users." In their experiment, 101 users interacted daily with an exercise adoption system, for one month. Compared to an equivalent task-oriented agent, the computer-based relational agent was trusted more. Placing agents on mobile devices could provide a potent combination of relationship building (an ever-present "buddy") and behavior change (providing timely and appropriate interventions). Work should be done regarding the nature of the buddy. Examples of conversational systems, such as R2D2 in Star Wars , and the Microsoft Office Assistant, engendered mixed results: the former was cute and helpful, and the latter was intrusive and grating. There are also political and ethical considerations in designing a buddy. Should the buddy be a thing or a neuter object, as in the two examples above, or should it perhaps be a male, or, as in the authors' study, a female__?__ And, finally, as the authors note, these proactive buddy scenarios, which are monitoring us, raise issues of privacy and security: with whom do you let the buddy share which pieces of relational or personal information, and how does it earn your trust to do so__?__ Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments