skip to main content
10.1145/3469595.3469608acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Putting wake words to bed: We speak wake words with systematically varied prosody, but CUIs don't listen

Published:27 July 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

‘Wake words’ such as "Alexa" or "Hey Siri", as conversation design elements, mimic the interactionally rich ‘summons-answer’ sequence in natural conversation, but their function amounts to little more than a button-push: simply activating the interface. In practice, however, users vocally overdesign their wake words with all the detail of a ‘real’ interactional summons. We hear users uttering wake words with a specific prosody and intonation, as though for a particular recipient in a particular social/pragmatic context. This presents a puzzle for designers of conversational user interfaces (CUIs). Previous research suggests that expert users simplify their talk when interacting with CUIs, but with wake words we observe the opposite. When users do the extra interactional work of varying their wake words in ways that seem ‘recipient designed’ for a specific other, does that suggest that designers are successfully eliciting natural interaction from users, or is it violating user expectations? Our two case studies highlight how the mismatch between user expectations and the limitations of how wake words are currently implemented can lead to cascades of interactional trouble, especially in multi-party conversations. We argue that designers should find new ways to activate CUIs that align users’ expectations with conversational system design.

References

  1. Charles Goodwin. 2007. Interactive footing. In Reporting Talk, Elizabeth Holt and Rebecca Clift (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 16–46. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486654.003Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexa Hepburn and Galina B Bolden. 2017. Transcribing for social research. Sage, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. William Housley, Saul Albert, and Elizabeth Stokoe. 2019. Natural Action Processing. In Proceedings of the Halfway to the Future Symposium 2019 (HTTF 2019), Association for Computing Machinery, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 1–4. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3363384.3363478Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Razan Jaber, Donald McMillan, Jordi Solsona Belenguer, and Barry Brown. 2019. Patterns of gaze in speech agent interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces - CUI ’19, ACM Press, Dublin, Ireland, 1–10. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3342775.3342791Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Seung-Hee Lee. 2006. Second summonings in Korean telephone conversation openings. Language in Society. 35, 02. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404506060118Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gene H Lerner. 2003. Selecting next speaker: The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization. Language in Society. 32, 02, 177–201. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450332202XGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. 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 (CHI ’16), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5286–5297. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858288Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Robert J. Moore and Raphael Arar. 2019. Conversational UX design: A practitioner's guide to the natural conversation framework. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Clifford Nass and Youngme Moon. 2000. Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers. Journal of Social Issues 56, 1 (2000), 81–103. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Hannah R. M. Pelikan and Mathias Broth. 2016. Why That Nao? In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI \textquotesingle16, ACM Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858478Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Danielle Pillet-Shore. 2018. How to Begin. Research on Language and Social Interaction 51, 3 (July 2018), 213–231. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2018.1485224Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Martin Porcheron, Joel E Fischer, Stuart Reeves, and Sarah Sharples. 2018. Voice Interfaces in Everyday Life. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI’18, ACM Press. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174214Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Stuart Reeves, Martin Porcheron, and Joel Fischer. 2018. “This is not what we wanted”: designing for conversation with voice interfaces. Interactions 26, 1, 46–51. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3296699Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Harvey Sacks. 1995. Lectures on conversation. Wiley-Blackwell, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Emanuel A Schegloff. 1968. Sequencing in Conversational Openings. American Anthropologist 70, 6, 1075–1095. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Emanuel A Schegloff. 1988. Presequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 12, 1 (1988), 55–62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Emanuel A Schegloff. 2007. Sequence organization in interaction: Volume 1: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

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 Other conferences
    CUI '21: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Conversational User Interfaces
    July 2021
    262 pages
    ISBN:9781450389983
    DOI:10.1145/3469595

    Copyright © 2021 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 the author(s) 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].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 27 July 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • short-paper
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate34of100submissions,34%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format