Computers Are Social Actors Research Articles

Humour Theory and Conversational Agents: An Application in the Development of Computer-based Agents

Much of the literature on the development of conversational agents comes from the domain of Human Computer Interaction (HCI) (Buchanan 2008; Cassell et al. 2000; Laurel 1993; Reeves and Nass 1996). The Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm suggests that a user will respond to a computer-based conversational agent in the same manner they would respond to a real person (Nass, Isbister, and Lee 2000). Shechtman and Horowitz, although critical of the conclusions of the CASA paradigm, suggest there is an “inextricable link between the use of natural language and social interaction. Perhaps relationship behaviors are simply difficult to filter out of communication and may arise as an artefact of using natural language in a conversational situation” (2003, p.288). Whether computers and humans are equal social actors or not may be an unnecessary distinction if the use of natural language is alone sufficient to generate the perception of social interaction and personality. If humour is one of the defining features of ‘human-ness’ then for a computer to truly be a social actor it must be able to engage in novel, surprising and humorous exchanges. This paper surveys a range of humour theories in search of a theory that can be applied to interactions of computer-based conversational agents.

I like you, but I won’t listen to you: Effects of rationality on affective and behavioral responses to computers that flatter

This experiment extended the computers are social actors (CASA) paradigm by investigating how rational thinking style moderates flattery effects in human–computer interaction. Participants played a trivia game with a computer, which they knew generated random answers that were accompanied by either strictly factual or flattering feedback on their performance. Although both high and low rationals attributed greater social attractiveness to the flattering computer than the one providing generic feedback, only low rationals exhibited different levels of conformity to flattering than generic-comment computers, favoring the latter. Results on recall memory and perceived validity of the computer feedback suggest that flattery elicited greater attention and heightened suspicion among those less prone to engage in analytical thinking, temporarily fostering mindfulness.

Flattery may get computers somewhere, sometimes: The moderating role of output modality, computer gender, and user gender

This experiment extended the Computers Are Social Actors ( CASA) paradigm by examining how output modality (text plus cartoon character vs. synthetic speech), computer gender (male vs. female), and user gender (male vs. female) moderate the ways in which people respond to computers that flatter. Specifically, participants played a trivia game with a computer, which they knew might provide incorrect answers. Participants in the generic-comment condition received strictly factual feedback, whereas those in the flattery condition were given additional remarks praising their performance. Consistent with Fogg and Nass [1997. Silicon sycophants: the effects of computers that flatter. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 46, 551–561] study, flattery led to more positive overall impressions and performance evaluations of the computer, but such effects were found only in the text plus character condition and among women. In addition, flattery increased participants’ suspicion about the validity of the computer's feedback and lowered conformity to the computer's suggestions. Participants conformed more to the male than female computers when computer gender was manifested in gendered cartoon characters in the text condition, with no corresponding effects in the speech condition. Results suggest that synthetic speech output might suppress social responses to computers, such as flattery effects and gender stereotyping.

Can a Robot Be Perceived as a Developing Creature?.

This study tests the effect of long-term artificial development of a robot on users' feelings of social presence and social responses toward the robot. The study is a 2 (developmental capability: developmental versus fully matured) × 2 (number of participants: individual versus group) between-subjects experiment (N= 40) in which participants interact with Sony's robot dog, AIBO, for a month. The results showed that the developmental capability factor had significant positive impacts on (a) perceptions of AIBO as a lifelike creature, (b) feelings of social presence, and (c) social responses toward AIBO. The number of participants factor, however, affected only the parasocial relationship and the buying intention variables. No interaction between the two factors was found. The results of a series of path analyses showed that feelings of social presence mediated participants' social responses toward AIBO. We discuss implications of the current study on human–robot interaction, the computers are social actors (CASA) paradigm, and the study of (tele)presence.

Multiple paradigms in affective computing

This brief essay considers the three papers of the special issue of Interacting with Computers by Picard and colleagues, from several perspectives. First, I question two aspects of the work: the Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) approach, and the use of psychophysiological measurements of emotion without a stated theory of emotion. Despite these criticisms, the contributions of Picard and colleagues are valuable and powerfully challenging. I suggest three convergent ways to pursue this important research program.

Criticism or praise? The impact of verbal versus text-only computer feedback on social presence, intrinsic motivation, and recall.

The Computers Are Social Actors (CASA) paradigm asserts that human computer users interact socially with computers, and has provided extensive evidence that this is the case. In this experiment (n = 134), participants received either praise or criticism from a computer. Independent variables were the direction feedback (praise or criticism), and voice channel (verbal or text-only). Dependent variables measured via a computer-based questionnaire were recall, perceived ability, intrinsic motivation, and perceptions of the computer as a social entity. Results demonstrate that participants had similar reactions to computers as predicted by interpersonal communication research with participants who received text-only criticism reporting higher levels of intrinsic motivation, perceived ability, and recall. Additionally, the computer was seen as more intelligent. Implications for theory and application are discussed.

Social Presence and Children: Praise, Intrinsic Motivation, and Learning with Computers

The computers are social actors (CASA) paradigm asserts that human computer users interact socially with computers, and the paradigm has provided extensive evidence that this is the case for adults. This experiment examined whether or not children have similar reactions to computers by comparing children's predictable responses to praise from a teacher to their responses to praise from a computer. Eight- to 10-year-old participants (N = 42) received either praise or neutral feedback from a computer. Independent variables were the feedback (praise or neutral), and participants' age and gender. Dependent variables measured via a paper-and-pencil questionnaire were learning (recall and recognition memory), perceived ability, and intrinsic motivation. Results provide evidence that children do have social responses to computers and that such social responses can lead to increases in learning (recall and recognition) in young children