Patrick Gebhard
ABSTRACT
Human interaction partners can deal with interruptions and then resume the interaction. This ability should be emulated by social agents. How fast interruptions are handled might influence the overall impression of an agent. In this paper, we present the results of a user study on how a human dialog partner perceives the be- havior of a virtual agent handling verbal user interruptions with different reaction times. The study goes beyond typical perception experiments by preserving the real-time interaction experience. For the evaluation, we rely on a parametrizable parallelized computa- tional model that represents dialog flow, overlap detection, conflict recognition, and conflict handling in real-time. The evaluation re- sults show that the timing of the agent's interruption handling in interactive human-agent dialogues is related to different interper- sonal attitudes.
- Icek Ajzen. 2005. Attitudes, personality, and behavior 2nd ed.). Open University Press, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Michael Argyle. 2007. Bodily Communication 2nd ed.). Routledge, East Sussex.Google Scholar
- Angelo Cafaro, Nadine Glas, and Catherine Pelachaud. 2016. The Effects of Interrupting Behavior on Interpersonal Attitude and Engagement in Dyadic Interactions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents & Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '16). International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Richland, SC, 911--920. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elizabeth Cashdan. 1998. Smiles, speech, and body posture: How women and men display sociometric status and power. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, Vol. 22, 4 (1998), 209--228.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Justine Cassell, Tim Bickmore, Lee Campbell, Hannes Vilhjalmsson, and Hao Yan. 2001. More than just a pretty face: conversational protocols and the affordances of embodiment. Knowledge-based systems, Vol. 14, 1 (2001), 55--64. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Crystal Chao. 2012. Timing Multimodal Turn-Taking for Human-robot Cooperation. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (ICMI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 309--312. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nigel Crook, Debora Field, Cameron Smith, Sue Harding, Stephen Pulman, Marc Cavazza, Daniel Charlton, Roger Moore, and Johan Boye. 2012. Generating context-sensitive ECA responses to user barge-in interruptions. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces, Vol. 6, 1--2 (2012), 13--25.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Uriel G. Foa. 1961. Convergences in the analysis of the structure of interpersonal behavior. Psychological Review, Vol. 68, 5 (1961), 341.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Patrick Gebhard, Tanja Schneeberger, Elisabeth André, Tobias Baur, Ionut Damian, Gregor Mehlmann, Cornelius König, and Markus Langer. 2018. Serious Games for Training Social Skills in Job Interviews. IEEE Transactions on Games (2018).Google Scholar
- Kathrin Janowski and Elisabeth André. 2019. What If I Speak Now? A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Personality-Based Turn-Taking. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, AAMAS 2019, Montré al, May 13--17, 2019 . Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zerrin Kasap, Maher Ben Moussa, Parag Chaudhuri, and Nadia Magnenat-Thalmann. 2009. Making Them Remember? Emotional Virtual Characters With Memory . IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, Vol. 29, 2 (2009), 20--29. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gregor Mehlmann, Kathrin Janowski, and Elisabeth André. 2016. Modeling Grounding for Interactive Social Companions . Special Issue of the German Journal of Artificial Intelligence: Social Companion Technologies, Vol. 30, 1 (2016), 45--52.Google Scholar
- Bahador Nooraei, Charles Rich, and Candace L. Sidner. 2014. A Real-Time Architecture for Embodied Conversational Agents: Beyond Turn-Taking. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions (ACHI '14). IARIA, Wilmington, DE, USA, 381--388.Google Scholar
- Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schlegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking . Journal of Language, Vol. 50, 4 (1974), 696--735.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mark Ter Maat, Khiet P. Truong, and Dirk Heylen. 2010. How Turn-Taking Strategies Influence Users' Impressions of an Agent. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (Lecture Notes in Computer Science),, Jan Allbeck, Norman Badler, Timothy Bickmore, Catherine Pelachaud, and Alla Safonova (Eds.), Vol. 6356. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Cham, 441--453. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nigel G. Ward and David DeVault. 2016. Ten Challenges in Highly-Interactive Dialog Systems . AI Magazine, Vol. 37, 4 (2016), 7--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Designing the Impression of Social Agents' Real-time Interruption Handling
Recommendations
Intrapersonal dependencies in multimodal behavior
IVA '20: Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual AgentsHuman interlocutors automatically adapt verbal and non-verbal signals so that different behaviors become synchronized over time. Multimodal communication comes naturally to humans, while this is not the case for Embodied Conversational Agents (ECAs). ...
Designing Socially Aware Conversational Agents
PIT '08: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE tutorial and research workshop on Perception and Interactive Technologies for Speech-Based Systems: Perception in Multimodal Dialogue SystemsIn this paper we address the problem of how to make conversational agents socially aware. State-of-the-art conversational agents cannot deal with multi-user situations where the user-system dialog is interleaved with discussions between users. We ...
Comments