skip to main content
10.1145/3170427.3188548acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Can a Machine Tend to Teenagers' Emotional Needs?: A Study with Conversational Agents

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

As teen stress and its negative consequences are on the rise, several studies have attempted to tend to their emotional needs through conversational agents (CAs). However, these attempts have focused on increasing human-like traits of agents, thereby overlooking the possible advantage of machine inherits, such as lack of emotion or the ability to perform calculations. Therefore, this paper aims to shed light on the machine inherits of CAs to help satisfy the emotional needs of teenagers. We conducted a workshop with 20 teenagers, followed by in-depth interviews with six of the participants. We discovered that teenagers expected CAs to (1) be good listeners due to their lack of emotion, (2) keep their secrets by being separated from the human world, and (3) give them advice based on the analysis of sufficient data. Based on our findings, we offer three design guidelines to build CAs.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

lbw1301-file3.mp4

mp4

2.1 MB

References

  1. American Psychological Association. Stress in America: Are teens adopting adults' stress habits. Stress in America Surveys. Retrieved January 22, 2018 from http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress/2013/stressreport.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Dalia M. Adams, James C. Overholser, Anthony Spirito. 1994. Stressful life events associated with adolescent suicide attempts. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 39, 1 (Feb. 1994), 43--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3, 2 (2006), 77--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Lyon, David, ed. Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk, and digital discrimination. Psychology Press, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Kathleen K. Fitzpatrick, Alison Darcy, Molly Vierhile. 2017. Delivering Cognitive Behavior Therapy to Young Adults With Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety Using a Fully Automated Conversational Agent (Woebot): A Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Mental Health. 4, 2 (June 2017), e19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gale M. Lucas, Jonathan Gratch, Aisha King, Louis-Philippe Morency. 2014. It's only a computer: Virtual humans increase willingness to disclose. Computers in Human Behavior 37 (Aug. 2014), 94--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hyeon Ju Lee. A comparative study of the perceptions of the secondary school teachers and students on the status of school counseling and the school counselor's role. The Korean Journal of Educational Psychology. 17, 4 (Dec. 2003), 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Ewa Lugar, Abigail 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, 5286--5297. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Kyung Sook Lee and Jung Ho Kim. 2000, The Effects of Study Stress Coping Training Program on the Reduction of Study Stress and the Academic Achievements of High School Students. The Korean Journal of Health Psychology. 5, 1 (June 2000), 43--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Laurel D. Riek, Tal-Chen Rabinowitch, Bhismadev Chakrabarti, Peter Robinson. 2009. How anthropomorphism affects empathy toward robots. In Proc. of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, 245--246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Ben Robins, Paul Dickerson, Penny Stribling, Kerstin Dautenhahn. 2004. Robot-mediated joint attention in children with autism: A case study in robot-human interaction. Interaction studies. 5, 2 (January 2004), 161--198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ian Rowlands, David Nicholas, Peter Williams, Paul Huntington, Maggie Fieldhouse, Barrie Gunter, ... & Carol Tenopir. 2008. The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future. In Aslib proc (Vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 290310). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Linda Patia Spear. 2009. Heightened stress responsivity and emotional reactivity during pubertal maturation: Implications for psychopathology. Development and psychopathology. 21, 1 (January 2009), 87--97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Laura Pfeifer Vardoulakis, Lazlo Ring, Barbara Barry, Candace Sidner, Timothy Bickmore. 2012. Designing relational agents as long term social companions for older adults. In Intelligent virtual agents. 289--302. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Robyn Whittaker, Sally Merry, Karolina Stasiak, Heather McDowell, Iain Doherty, Matthew Shepherd, Enid Dorey, Varsha Parag, Shanthi Ameratunga, Anthony Rodgers. 2012. MEMO - a mobile phone depression prevention intervention for adolescents: development process and postprogram findings on acceptability from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of medical Internet research. 14, 1 (January 2012).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Can a Machine Tend to Teenagers' Emotional Needs?: A Study with 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 EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      3155 pages
      ISBN:9781450356213
      DOI:10.1145/3170427

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 April 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate1,208of3,955submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader