research-article

Face Value? Exploring the Effects of Embodiment for a Group Facilitation Agent

Authors:

Ameneh Shamekhi,

Rachel K. E. Bellamy,

Thomas EricksonAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Paper No.: 391, Pages 1 - 13

https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173965

Published: 21 April 2018 Publication History

Abstract

We are interested in increasing the ability of groups to collaborate efficiently by leveraging new advances in AI and Conversational Agent (CA) technology. Given the longstanding debate on the necessity of embodiment for CAs, bringing them to groups requires answering the questions of whether and how providing a CA with a face affects its interaction with the humans in a group. We explored these questions by comparing group decision-making sessions facilitated by an embodied agent, versus a voice-only agent. Results of an experiment with 20 user groups revealed that while the embodiment improved various aspects of group's social perception of the agent (e.g., rapport, trust, intelligence, and power), its impact on the group-decision process and outcome was nuanced. Drawing on both quantitative and qualitative findings, we discuss the pros and cons of embodiment, argue that the value of having a face depends on the types of assistance the agent provides, and lay out directions for future research.

References

[1]

Robert K Atkinson. 2002. Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology 94, 2 (2002), 416.

[2]

Christoph Bartneck, Dana Kuli´ c, Elizabeth Croft, and Susana Zoghbi. 2009. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics 1, 1 (2009), 71--81.

[3]

Amy L Baylor. 2009. Promoting motivation with virtual agents and avatars: role of visual presence and appearance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 364, 1535 (2009), 3559--3565.

[4]

Timothy Bickmore and Justine Cassell. 2001. Relational agents: a model and implementation of building user trust. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 396--403.

Digital Library

[5]

Timothy Bickmore and Justine Cassell. 2005. Social dialogue with embodied conversational agents. Advances in natural multimodal dialogue systems 30 (2005), 23--54.

[6]

Timothy W Bickmore, Laura M Pfeifer, and Brian W Jack. 2009. Taking the time to care: empowering low health literacy hospital patients with virtual nurse agents. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1265--1274.

Digital Library

[7]

Dan Bohus and Eric Horvitz. 2010. Facilitating multiparty dialog with gaze, gesture, and speech. In International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces and the Workshop on Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction. ACM, 5.

Digital Library

[8]

Jay Bradley, David Benyon, Oli Mival, and Nick Webb. 2010. Wizard of Oz experiments and companion dialogues. In Proceedings of the 24th BCS Interaction Specialist Group Conference. British Computer Society, 117--123.

Digital Library

[9]

Justine Cassell. 2000. Embodied conversational agents. MIT press.

Digital Library

[10]

Justine Cassell. 2001. Embodied conversational agents: representation and intelligence in user interfaces. AI magazine 22, 4 (2001), 67.

Digital Library

[11]

Justine Cassell and Timothy Bickmore. 2000. External manifestations of trustworthiness in the interface. Commun. ACM 43, 12 (2000), 50--56.

Digital Library

[12]

Justine Cassell, Timothy Bickmore, Mark Billinghurst, Lee Campbell, Kenny Chang, Hannes Vilhjálmsson, and Hao Yan. 1999. Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 520--527.

Digital Library

[13]

Justine Cassell, Hannes Högni Vilhjálmsson, and Timothy Bickmore. 2001. Beat: the behavior expression animation toolkit. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM, 477--486.

Digital Library

[14]

Konstantina Christakopoulou, Filip Radlinski, and Katja Hofmann. 2016. Towards Conversational Recommender Systems. In KDD. 815--824.

Digital Library

[15]

Peter Cook, Clarence Ellis, Mike Graf, Gail Rein, and Tom Smith. 1987. Project Nick: meetings augmentation and analysis. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) 5, 2 (1987), 132--146.

Digital Library

[16]

Duncan Cramer and Dennis Laurence Howitt. 2004. The Sage dictionary of statistics: a practical resource for students in the social sciences. Sage.

[17]

Nils Dahlbäck, Arne Jönsson, and Lars Ahrenberg. 1993. Wizard of Oz studies why and how. Knowledge-based systems 6, 4 (1993), 258--266.

Digital Library

[18]

Doris M Dehn and Susanne Van Mulken. 2000. The impact of animated interface agents: a review of empirical research. International journal of human-computer studies 52, 1 (2000), 1--22.

Digital Library

[19]

Gerardine Desanctis and R Brent Gallupe. 1987. A Foundation For The Study Of Group Decision Support Systems. Management Science 33 (1987), N0.

[20]

Shelly Farnham, Harry R Chesley, Debbie E McGhee, Reena Kawal, and Jennifer Landau. 2000. Structured online interactions: improving the decision-making of small discussion groups. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, 299--308.

Digital Library

[21]

Gregg Foster and Mark Stefik. 1986. Cognoter: theory and practice of a colab-orative tool. In Proceedings of the 1986 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work. ACM, 7--15.

Digital Library

[22]

Arthur C Graesser, Patrick Chipman, Brian C Haynes, and Andrew Olney. 2005. AutoTutor: An intelligent tutoring system with mixed-initiative dialogue. IEEE Transactions on Education 48, 4 (2005), 612--618.

Digital Library

[23]

Jonathan Gratch, Ning Wang, Jillian Gerten, Edward Fast, and Robin Duffy. 2007. Creating rapport with virtual agents. In International Workshop on Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, 125--138.

Digital Library

[24]

Michael Haller, Jakob Leitner, Thomas Seifried, James R Wallace, Stacey D Scott, Christoph Richter, Peter Brandl, Adam Gokcezade, and Seth Hunter. 2010. The nice discussion room: Integrating paper and digital media to support co-located group meetings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 609--618.

Digital Library

[25]

Dai Hasegawa, Justine Cassell, and Kenji Araki. 2010. The Role of Embodiment and Perspective in Direction-Giving Systems. In Aaai fall symposium: Dialog with robots.

[26]

Renate Häuslschmid, Max von Buelow, Bastian Pfleging, and Andreas Butz. 2017. SupportingTrust in Autonomous Driving. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. ACM, 319--329.

Digital Library

[27]

Starr Roxanne Hiltz, Kenneth Johnson, and Murray Turoff. 1986. Experiments in group decision making communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human communication research 13, 2 (1986), 225--252.

[28]

Joshua E Introne. 2009. Supporting group decisions by mediating deliberation to improve information pooling. In Proceedings of the ACM 2009 international conference on Supporting group work. ACM, 189--198.

Digital Library

[29]

Sam Kaner. 2014. Facilitator's guide to participatory decision-making. John Wiley & Sons.

[30]

Tomoko Koda and Pattie Maes. 1996. Agents with faces: The effect of personification. In Robot and Human Communication, 1996., 5th IEEE International Workshop on. IEEE, 189--194.

[31]

Rohit Kumar and Carolyn P Rose. 2011. Architecture for building conversational agents that support collaborative learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 4, 1 (2011), 21--34.

Digital Library

[32]

James C Lester, Sharolyn A Converse, Susan E Kahler, S Todd Barlow, Brian A Stone, and Ravinder S Bhogal. 1997. The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 359--366.

Digital Library

[33]

Ewa Luger and 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. ACM, 5286--5297.

Digital Library

[34]

Yoichi Matsuyama, Iwao Akiba, Shinya Fujie, and Tetsunori Kobayashi. 2015. Four-participant group conversation: A facilitation robot controlling engagement density as the fourth participant. Computer Speech & Language 33, 1 (2015), 1--24.

Digital Library

[35]

Joseph E McGrath. 1991. Time, interaction, and performance (TIP) A Theory of Groups. Small group research 22, 2 (1991), 147--174.

[36]

Moira McGregor and John C Tang. 2017. More to Meetings: Challenges in Using Speech-Based Technology to Support Meetings. In CSCW. 2208--2220.

Digital Library

[37]

Nicolas Michinov and Estelle Michinov. 2008. Face-to-face contact at the midpoint of an online collaboration: Its impact on the patterns of participation, interaction, affect, and behavior over time. Computers & Education 50, 4 (2008), 1540--1557.

Digital Library

[38]

Shalla M Miranda and Robert P Bostrom. 1999. Meeting facilitation: process versus content interventions. Journal of Management information systems 15, 4 (1999), 89--114.

Digital Library

[39]

Roxana Moreno, Richard Mayer, and James Lester. 2000. Life-like pedagogical agents in constructivist multimedia environments: Cognitive consequences of their interaction. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 776--781.

[40]

Roxana Moreno, Richard E Mayer, Hiller A Spires, and James C Lester. 2001. The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and instruction 19, 2 (2001), 177--213.

[41]

Masahiro Mori. 1970. The uncanny valley. Energy 7, 4 (1970), 33--35.

[42]

Geoff Norman. 2010. Likert scales, levels of measurement and the laws of statistics. Advances in health sciences education 15, 5 (2010), 625--632.

[43]

David Novick and Iván Gris. 2014. Building rapport between human and ECA: A pilot study. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 472--480.

[44]

Kristine L Nowak and Frank Biocca. 2003. The effect of the agency and anthropomorphism on users' sense of telepresence, copresence, and social presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 12, 5 (2003), 481--494.

Digital Library

[45]

Jay F. Nunamaker, Alan R Dennis, Joseph S Valacich, Douglas Vogel, and Joey F George. 1991. Electronic meeting systems. Commun. ACM 34, 7 (1991), 40--61.

Digital Library

[46]

Jay F Nunamaker, Douglas C Derrick, Aaron C Elkins, Judee K Burgoon, and Mark W Patton. 2011. Embodied conversational agent-based kiosk for automated interviewing. Journal of Management Information Systems 28, 1 (2011), 17--48.

Digital Library

[47]

Amy Ogan, Samantha L Finkelstein, Erin Walker, Ryan Carlson, and Justine Cassell. 2012. Rudeness and Rapport: Insults and Learning Gains in Peer Tutoring. In ITS. Springer, 11--21.

Digital Library

[48]

José C Pinheiro and Douglas M Bates. 2000. Linear mixed-effects models: basic concepts and examples. Mixed-effects models in S and S-Plus (2000), 3--56.

[49]

Marshall Scott Poole, Michael Homes, and Gerardine DeSanctis. 1988. Conflict management and group decision support systems. In Proceedings of the 1988 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work. ACM, 227--243.

Digital Library

[50]

Martin Porcheron, Joel E Fischer, and Sarah Sharples. 2016. Using mobile phones in pub talk. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. ACM, 1649--1661.

Digital Library

[51]

Laurel D Riek. 2012. Wizard of oz studies in hri: a systematic review and new reporting guidelines. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 1, 1 (2012).

Digital Library

[52]

Eduardo Salas, Rebecca Grossman, Ashley M Hughes, and Chris W Coultas. 2015. Measuring team cohesion: Observations from the science. Human factors 57, 3 (2015), 365--374.

[53]

Gregory P Sbea and Richard A Guzzo. 1987. Group effectiveness: what really matters? Sloan Management Review (1986--1998) 28, 3 (1987), 25.

[54]

Akikazu Takeuchi and Taketo Naito. 1995. Situated facial displays: towards social interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 450--455.

Digital Library

[55]

Ronald K Thornton and David R Sokoloff. 1998. Assessing student learning of Newton laws: The force and motion conceptual evaluation and the evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula. American Journal of Physics 66, 4 (1998), 338--352.

[56]

Susanne Van Mulken, Elisabeth André, and Jochen Müller. 1998. The persona effect: How substantial is it? In People and computers XIII. Springer, 53--66.

Digital Library

[57]

Susanne Van Mulken, Elisabeth André, and Jochen Müller. 1999. An empirical study on the trustworthiness of life-like interface agents. In HCI (2). 152--156.

Digital Library

[58]

Stephen Viller. 1991. The group facilitator: a CSCW perspective. In Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work ECSCW. Springer, 81--95.

Digital Library

[59]

Janet H Walker, Lee Sproull, and R Subramani. 1994. Using a human face in an interface. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 85--91.

Digital Library

[60]

Pierre Wargnier, Giovanni Carletti, Yann Laurent-Corniquet, Samuel Benveniste, Pierre Jouvelot, and Anne-Sophie Rigaud. 2016. Field evaluation with cognitively-impaired older adults of attention management in the embodied conversational agent louise. In Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), 2016 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 1--8.

[61]

Bodo Winter. 2013. A very basic tutorial for performing linear mixed effects analyses. arXiv preprint arXiv:1308.5499 (2013).

[62]

Nick Yee, Jeremy N Bailenson, and Kathryn Rickertsen. 2007. A meta-analysis of the impact of the inclusion and realism of human-like faces on user experiences in interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1--10.

Digital Library

[63]

Alvin Frederick Zander. 1982. Making groups effective. Jossey-Bass.

[64]

Ran Zhao, Alexandros Papangelis, and Justine Cassell. 2014. Towards a dyadic computational model of rapport management for human-virtual agent interaction. In International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, 514--527.

Cited By

Seaborn KUrakami JPennefather PMiyake N(2024)Qualitative Approaches to Voice UXACM Computing Surveys10.1145/365866656:12(1-34)Online publication date: 20-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3658666
Armstrong MYang CSkiers KLim MGunasekaran TWang ZNarumi TMinamizawa KPai Y(2024)SealMates: Improving Communication in Video Conferencing using a Collective Behavior-Driven AvatarProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373958:CSCW1(1-23)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637395
Roomkham SSitbon L(2024)Restarting the conversation about conversational search: exploring new possibilities for multimodal and collaborative systems with people with intellectual disabilityProceedings of the 2024 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval10.1145/3627508.3638339(231-242)Online publication date: 10-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3627508.3638339
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Face Value? Exploring the Effects of Embodiment for a Group Facilitation Agent
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

What Makes a Good Conversation?: Challenges in Designing Truly Conversational Agents
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Conversational agents promise conversational interaction but fail to deliver. Efforts often emulate functional rules from human speech, without considering key characteristics that conversation must encapsulate. Given its potential in supporting long-...
Extrovert Increases Consensus? Exploring the Effects of Conversational Agent Personality for Group Decision Support
CHCHI '23: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium of Chinese CHI

Conversational agent research has significantly shifted from solely focusing on technical capabilities to emphasizing the agent’s social and conversational abilities. Previous research indicates that the agent’s personality, as an essential ...
Meeting facilitation: process versus content interventions

This article examines the impacts of two types of meeting facilitation that occur in traditional and GSS environments: process and content facilitation. Based on existing facilitation, leadership, and GSS research, and structuration theory, we ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 2018

8489 pages

ISBN:9781450356206

DOI:10.1145/3173574

General Chairs:
Regan Mandryk
University of Saskatchewan, Canada
,
Mark Hancock
University of Waterloo, Canada
,
Program Chairs:
Mark Perry
Brunel University London, UK
,
Anna Cox
University College London, UK

Copyright © 2018 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 ACM 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]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 April 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CHI '18

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI '18: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 21 - 26, 2018

Montreal QC, Canada

Acceptance Rates

CHI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 666 of 2,590 submissions, 26%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

88
Total Citations
View Citations
1,431
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)293
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)35

Reflects downloads up to 24 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Seaborn KUrakami JPennefather PMiyake N(2024)Qualitative Approaches to Voice UXACM Computing Surveys10.1145/365866656:12(1-34)Online publication date: 20-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3658666
Armstrong MYang CSkiers KLim MGunasekaran TWang ZNarumi TMinamizawa KPai Y(2024)SealMates: Improving Communication in Video Conferencing using a Collective Behavior-Driven AvatarProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373958:CSCW1(1-23)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3637395
Roomkham SSitbon L(2024)Restarting the conversation about conversational search: exploring new possibilities for multimodal and collaborative systems with people with intellectual disabilityProceedings of the 2024 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval10.1145/3627508.3638339(231-242)Online publication date: 10-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3627508.3638339
Zojaji SMatviienko ALeite IPeters C(2024)Join Me Here if You Will: Investigating Embodiment and Politeness Behaviors When Joining Small Groups of Humans, Robots, and Virtual CharactersProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642905(1-16)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642905
Kuang ELi MFan MShinohara K(2024)Enhancing UX Evaluation Through Collaboration with Conversational AI Assistants: Effects of Proactive Dialogue and TimingProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642168(1-16)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642168
Yang CMatsumoto KYu SSawada LArakawa KYamada DKuzuoka H(2023)Understanding the effect of a virtual moderator on people’s perception in remote discussion using social VRFrontiers in Virtual Reality10.3389/frvir.2023.11980244Online publication date: 18-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2023.1198024
Yin BWu S(2023)Enhancing organizational communication via intelligent voice assistant for knowledge workers: The role of perceived supervisor support, psychological capital, and employee wellbeingFrontiers in Communication10.3389/fcomm.2022.10847037Online publication date: 6-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2022.1084703
Wang LLi HWu TYang FYang YHuang JTian F(2023)Extrovert Increases Consensus? Exploring the Effects of Conversational Agent Personality for Group Decision SupportProceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium of Chinese CHI10.1145/3629606.3629619(127-138)Online publication date: 13-Nov-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3629606.3629619
Cox SLee YOoi W(2023)Comparing How a Chatbot References User Utterances from Previous Chatting Sessions: An Investigation of Users' Privacy Concerns and PerceptionsProceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction10.1145/3623809.3623875(105-114)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3623809.3623875
Do HKong HTetali PKarahalios KBailey B(2023)Inform, Explain, or Control: Techniques to Adjust End-User Performance Expectations for a Conversational Agent Facilitating Group Chat DiscussionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36101927:CSCW2(1-26)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610192
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents