What Makes a Good Conversation? Challenges in Designing Truly Conversational Agents
read the original abstract
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-term human-agent relationships, it is paramount that HCI focuses efforts on delivering this promise. We aim to understand what people value in conversation and how this should manifest in agents. Findings from a series of semi-structured interviews show people make a clear dichotomy between social and functional roles of conversation, emphasising the long-term dynamics of bond and trust along with the importance of context and relationship stage in the types of conversations they have. People fundamentally questioned the need for bond and common ground in agent communication, shifting to more utilitarian definitions of conversational qualities. Drawing on these findings we discuss key challenges for conversational agent design, most notably the need to redefine the design parameters for conversational agent interaction.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Mapping Perceptions of Humanness in Speech-Based Intelligent Personal Assistant Interaction
Perceptions of humanness in speech-based IPAs are multidimensional, with users viewing the assistants as more formal, fact-based, impersonal, and less authentic than humans across eight identified themes.
-
What's in an accent? The impact of accented synthetic speech on lexical choice in human-machine dialogue
Accented synthetic speech leads users to align their lexical choices with the perceived accent of the machine partner, mirroring human-human dialogue patterns.
-
Multitasking with Alexa Multitasking with Alexa: How Using Intelligent Personal Assistants Impacts Language-based Primary Task Performance
IPA use disrupts content-generation writing tasks more than copying tasks because they share more cognitive resources.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.