Benjamin R. Cowan
Nadia Pantidi
David Coyle
ABSTRACT
Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) are widely available on devices such as smartphones. However, most people do not use them regularly. Previous research has studied the experiences of frequent IPA users. Using qualitative methods we explore the experience of infrequent users: people who have tried IPAs, but choose not to use them regularly. Unsurprisingly infrequent users share some of the experiences of frequent users, e.g. frustration at limitations on fully hands-free interaction. Significant points of contrast and previously unidentified concerns also emerge. Cultural norms and social embarrassment take on added significance for infrequent users. Humanness of IPAs sparked comparisons with human assistants, juxtaposing their limitations. Most importantly, significant concerns emerged around privacy, monetization, data permanency and transparency. Drawing on these findings we discuss key challenges, including: designing for interruptability; reconsideration of the human metaphor; issues of trust and data ownership. Addressing these challenges may lead to more widespread IPA use.
- M. P. Aylett, P. O. Kristensson, S. Whittaker, and Y. Vazquez-Alvarez. 2014. None of a CHInd: Relationship Counselling for HCI and Speech Technology. In CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '14), 749--760. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. P. Aylett and S. Lawson. 2016. The Smartphone: A Lacanian Stain, A Tech Killer, and an Embodiment of Radical Individualism. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16), 501--511. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Baber. Developing interactive speech technology. Interactive speech technology: 1--18. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Bell and J. Gustafson. 1999. Interaction with an animated agent in a spoken dialogue system. In Proceedings of the Sixth European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, 1143--1146.Google Scholar
- L. Bell, J. Gustafson, and M. Heldner. 2003. Prosodic adaptation in human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of ICPhS 2003, 2453--2456.Google Scholar
- H. P. Branigan, M. J. Pickering, J. M. Pearson, J. F. McLean, and A. Brown. 2011. The role of beliefs in lexical alignment: Evidence from dialogs with humans and computers. Cognition 121, 1: 41--57.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. Braun and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2: 77--101.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Cassell. 2007. Body Language: Lessons from the Near-Human. In Genesis Redux: Essays on the History and Philosophy of Artificial Life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 346--374.Google Scholar
- W. Chan, N. Jaitly, Q. Le, and O. Vinyals. 2016. Listen, attend and spell: A neural network for large vocabulary conversational speech recognition. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 4960--4964.Google Scholar
- H. H. Clark. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- P. Cohen, A Cheyer, E. Horvitz, R. El Kaliouby, and S. Whittaker. 2016. On the Future of Personal Assistants. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16), 1032--1037. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Cooper, A. Chang, Y. Levitan, and J. Hirschberg. 2016. Data Selection and Adaptation for Naturalness in HMM-based Speech Synthesis. Proceedings of Interspeech 2016, 357--361.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. R. Cowan and H. P. Branigan. 2015. Does voice anthropomorphism affect lexical alignment in speech-based human- computer dialogue? In Proceedings of Interspeech 2015, 155--159.Google Scholar
- B. R. Cowan, H. P. Branigan, H. Begum, L. McKenna, and E. Szekely. 2017. They Know as Much as We Do: Knowledge Estimation and Partner Modelling of Artificial Partners. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
- B. R. Cowan, H. P. Branigan, E. Bugis, M. Obregon, and R. Beale. 2015. Voice anthropomorphism, interlocutor modelling and alignment effects on syntactic alignment in human-computer dialogue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 83: 27--42. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. R. Cowan, D. Gannon, J. Walsh, J. Kinneen, E. O'Keefe, and L. Xie. 2016. Towards Understanding How Speech Output Affects Navigation System Credibility. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '16), 2805--2812. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Edlund, J. Gustafson, M. Heldner, and A. Hjalmarsson. 2008. Towards human-like spoken dialogue systems. Speech Communication 50, 8--9: 630--645. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Factor1. 2016. Voice Assistant Anyone? Yes please, but not in public! Creative Strategies, Inc. Retrieved August 26, 2016 from http://creativestrategies.com/voice-assistant-anyone-yes-please-but-not-in-public/Google Scholar
- E. Gilmartin, F. Bonin, L. Cerrato, C. Vogel, and N. Campbell. 2015. What's the Game and Who's Got the Ball? Genre in Spoken Interaction. In 2015 AAAI Spring Symposium Series.Google Scholar
- E Gilmartin and N. Campbell. 2014. More Than Just Words: Building a Chatty Robot. In Natural Interaction with Robots, Knowbots and Smartphones, Joseph Mariani, Sophie Rosset, Martine Garnier-Rizet and Laurence Devillers (eds.). Springer New York, 179--185.Google Scholar
- E. Goffman. 1971. Relations in public: microstudies of the public order. Basic Books.Google Scholar
- J. Hauswald, M. A. Laurenzano, Y. Zhang, C. Li, A. Rovinski, A. Khurana, R. G. Dreslinski, T. Mudge, V. Petrucci, L. Tang, and J. Mars. 2015. Sirius: An Open End-to-End Voice and Vision Personal Assistant and Its Implications for Future Warehouse Scale Computers. In Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS '15), 223--238. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K.S. Hone and C. Baber. 2001. Designing habitable dialogues for speech-based interaction with computers. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 54, 4: 637--662. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Humphreys. 2005. Cellphones in public: social interactions in a wireless era. New Media & Society 7, 6: 810--833.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Ito. 2005. Mobile Phones, Japanese Youth, and the Re-placement of Social Contact. In Mobile Communications. Springer London, 131--148.Google Scholar
- K. Jokinen and M. McTear. 2009. Spoken Dialogue Systems. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies 2, 1: 1--151.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Jöst, J. Häußler, M. Merdes, and R. Malaka. 2005. Multimodal Interaction for Pedestrians: An Evaluation Study. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '05), 59--66. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kamitis. 2016. Intelligent Personal Assistant-Products, Technologies and Market: 2017-2022.Google Scholar
- James E. Katz and Mark Aakhus. 2002. Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Kennedy, A. Wilkes, L. Elder, and W. S. Murray. 1988. Dialogue with machines. Cognition 30, 1: 37--72.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Kitzinger. 1995. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 311, 7000: 299--302.Google Scholar
- P. Lison and R. Meena. 2014. Spoken Dialogue Systems: The New Frontier in Human-computer Interaction. XRDS 21, 1: 46--51. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Lovato and A. Piper. 2015. "Siri, is This You?": Understanding Young Children's Interactions with Voice Input Systems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '15), 335--338. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Luger and A. Sellen. 2016. "Like Having a Really Bad PA": The Gulf Between User Expectation and Experience of Conversational Agents. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16), 5286--5297. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Milhorat, S. Schlögl, G. Chollet, J. Boudy, A. Esposito, and G. Pelosi. 2014. Building the next generation of personal digital Assistants. In 2014 1st International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Signal and Image Processing (ATSIP), 458--463.Google Scholar
- A. E. Moorthy and K. L. Vu. 2014. Voice Activated Personal Assistant: Acceptability of Use in the Public Space. In Human Interface and the Management of Information. Information and Knowledge in Applications and Services, Sakae Yamamoto (ed.). Springer International Publishing, 324--334. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. E. Moorthy and K. L. Vu. 2015. Privacy Concerns for Use of Voice Activated Personal Assistant in the Public Space. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 31, 4: 307--335.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. P. Olive. 1999. The voice user interface. In Global Telecommunications Conference, 1999. GLOBECOM '99, 2051--2055 vol.4.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Oviatt, J. Bernard, and G. A. Levow. 1998. Linguistic adaptations during spoken and multimodal error resolution. Language and speech 41 (Pt 3-4): 419--442.Google Scholar
- S. Oviatt, M. MacEachern, and G. Levow. 1998. Predicting hyperarticulate speech during human-computer error resolution. Speech Communication 24, 2: 87--110. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. A. Rodden, J. E. Fischer, N. Pantidi, K. Bachour, and S. Moran. 2013. At Home with Agents: Exploring Attitudes Towards Future Smart Energy Infrastructures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 1173--1182. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Russell, S. D'Arcy, and L. Qun. 2007. The Effects of Bandwidth Reduction on Human and Computer Recognition of Children's Speech. IEEE Signal Processing Letters 14, 12: 1044--1046.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. J. Russell and S. D'Arcy. 2007. Challenges for computer recognition of children's speech. In SLaTE, 108--111.Google Scholar
- B. Shneiderman. 2000. The limits of speech recognition. Communications of the ACM 43, 9: 63--65. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Wulf, M. Garschall, J. Himmelsbach, and M. Tscheligi. 2014. Hands Free - Care Free: Elderly People Taking Advantage of Speech-only Interaction. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (NordiCHI '14), 203--206. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 98% of iPhone users have tried Siri, but most don't use it regularly - Business Insider. Retrieved September 7, 2016 from http://uk.businessinsider.com/98-of-iphone-users-have-tried-siri-but-most-dont-use-it-regularly-2016-6?r=US&IR=TGoogle Scholar
- Here's How Siri Will Work In MacOS Sierra | Digital Trends. Retrieved September 20, 2016 from http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/siri-macos-sierra-features-interface/Google Scholar
- The Voice UI has Gone Mainstream | Tech.pinions - Perspective, Insight, Analysis. Retrieved February 2, 2017 from https://techpinions.com/the-voice-ui-has-gone-mainstream/46148Google Scholar
Index Terms
- "What can i help you with?": infrequent users' experiences of intelligent personal assistants
Recommendations
"Accessibility Came by Accident": Use of Voice-Controlled Intelligent Personal Assistants by People with Disabilities
CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsFrom an accessibility perspective, voice-controlled, home-based intelligent personal assistants (IPAs) have the potential to greatly expand speech interaction beyond dictation and screen reader output. To examine the accessibility of off-the-shelf IPAs (...
How to Remember What to Remember: Exploring Possibilities for Digital Reminder Systems
Digital reminder systems typically use time and place as triggers to remind people to perform activities. In this paper, we investigate how digital reminder systems could better support the process of remembering in a wider range of situations. We ...
Finally Johnny Can Encrypt: But Does This Make Him Feel More Secure?
ARES '18: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and SecurityEnd-to-end (E2E) encryption is an effective measure against privacy infringement. In 2016, it was introduced by WhatsApp for all users (of the latest app version) quasi overnight. However, it is unclear how non-expert users perceived this change, ...
Comments