2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

User attitude towards an embodied conversational agent: Effects of the interaction mode

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
20
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
1
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We present two possible explanations for this phenomenon: First, anthropomorphism may happen unconsciously without the users' control or direct attention. As the literature shows that individuals speak intuitively [7] and that spoken interactions are more personal [26], it is likely that individuals do not deliberately anthropomorphize a VA, but still behave differently during the interaction. Second, the extant literature also shows that there are various ways to infer anthropomorphism [5]; voice output, without any visual component, may not be sufficient to provide the impression of a human being.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We present two possible explanations for this phenomenon: First, anthropomorphism may happen unconsciously without the users' control or direct attention. As the literature shows that individuals speak intuitively [7] and that spoken interactions are more personal [26], it is likely that individuals do not deliberately anthropomorphize a VA, but still behave differently during the interaction. Second, the extant literature also shows that there are various ways to infer anthropomorphism [5]; voice output, without any visual component, may not be sufficient to provide the impression of a human being.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared to text input, speech is more intuitive [7] and requires less mental workload [6]. As a result, spoken interactions are more personal, they foster warmer user attitudes [26], and they encourage users to trust machines with more personal information [27]. In contrast, especially for high complexity tasks that may require user confirmation and control, text is preferred to voice [8].…”
Section: Voice Assistantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In prior CA research, Litman et al [42] already added spoken language capabilities to text-based dialog tutors but were not able to reveal positive effects [41]. However, more recent research shows that if learners also verbalize their knowledge (e.g., also respond to the CA via voice), they are able to improve their learning process [36,53]. Thus, we propose:…”
Section: Cognitive Theory Of Multimedia Learningmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…However, [144] found that the likeability of their ECA depended mainly on the agent's ability to answer the users requests appropriately, which shows the importance of building appropriate interaction strategies integrating deep analysis of user sentimentrelated phenomena for which mirroring may not be sufficiently complex. Besides, engagement policies that are coupled with user models [79,145] are required to vary their behavior in a more subtle way.…”
Section: Increasing the Agent Likeability And The Engagement Of The Usermentioning
confidence: 99%