Usability Comparison Among Healthy Participants of an Anthropomorphic Digital Human and a Text-Based Chatbot as a Responder to Questions on Mental Health: Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 2.6 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR Human Factors Pub Date : 2024-04-29 DOI:10.2196/54581
Almira Osmanovic Thunström, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Lilas Ali, Tomas Larson, Andreas Hellström, Steinn Steingrimsson
{"title":"Usability Comparison Among Healthy Participants of an Anthropomorphic Digital Human and a Text-Based Chatbot as a Responder to Questions on Mental Health: Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Almira Osmanovic Thunström, Hanne Krage Carlsen, Lilas Ali, Tomas Larson, Andreas Hellström, Steinn Steingrimsson","doi":"10.2196/54581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of chatbots in mental health support has increased exponentially in recent years, with studies showing that they may be effective in treating mental health problems. More recently, the use of visual avatars called digital humans has been introduced. Digital humans have the capability to use facial expressions as another dimension in human-computer interactions. It is important to study the difference in emotional response and usability preferences between text-based chatbots and digital humans for interacting with mental health services.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to explore to what extent a digital human interface and a text-only chatbot interface differed in usability when tested by healthy participants, using BETSY (Behavior, Emotion, Therapy System, and You) which uses 2 distinct interfaces: a digital human with anthropomorphic features and a text-only user interface. We also set out to explore how chatbot-generated conversations on mental health (specific to each interface) affected self-reported feelings and biometrics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We explored to what extent a digital human with anthropomorphic features differed from a traditional text-only chatbot regarding perception of usability through the System Usability Scale, emotional reactions through electroencephalography, and feelings of closeness. Healthy participants (n=45) were randomized to 2 groups that used a digital human with anthropomorphic features (n=25) or a text-only chatbot with no such features (n=20). The groups were compared by linear regression analysis and t tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences were observed between the text-only and digital human groups regarding demographic features. The mean System Usability Scale score was 75.34 (SD 10.01; range 57-90) for the text-only chatbot versus 64.80 (SD 14.14; range 40-90) for the digital human interface. Both groups scored their respective chatbot interfaces as average or above average in usability. Women were more likely to report feeling annoyed by BETSY.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The text-only chatbot was perceived as significantly more user-friendly than the digital human, although there were no significant differences in electroencephalography measurements. Male participants exhibited lower levels of annoyance with both interfaces, contrary to previously reported findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11091805/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/54581","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The use of chatbots in mental health support has increased exponentially in recent years, with studies showing that they may be effective in treating mental health problems. More recently, the use of visual avatars called digital humans has been introduced. Digital humans have the capability to use facial expressions as another dimension in human-computer interactions. It is important to study the difference in emotional response and usability preferences between text-based chatbots and digital humans for interacting with mental health services.

Objective: This study aims to explore to what extent a digital human interface and a text-only chatbot interface differed in usability when tested by healthy participants, using BETSY (Behavior, Emotion, Therapy System, and You) which uses 2 distinct interfaces: a digital human with anthropomorphic features and a text-only user interface. We also set out to explore how chatbot-generated conversations on mental health (specific to each interface) affected self-reported feelings and biometrics.

Methods: We explored to what extent a digital human with anthropomorphic features differed from a traditional text-only chatbot regarding perception of usability through the System Usability Scale, emotional reactions through electroencephalography, and feelings of closeness. Healthy participants (n=45) were randomized to 2 groups that used a digital human with anthropomorphic features (n=25) or a text-only chatbot with no such features (n=20). The groups were compared by linear regression analysis and t tests.

Results: No differences were observed between the text-only and digital human groups regarding demographic features. The mean System Usability Scale score was 75.34 (SD 10.01; range 57-90) for the text-only chatbot versus 64.80 (SD 14.14; range 40-90) for the digital human interface. Both groups scored their respective chatbot interfaces as average or above average in usability. Women were more likely to report feeling annoyed by BETSY.

Conclusions: The text-only chatbot was perceived as significantly more user-friendly than the digital human, although there were no significant differences in electroencephalography measurements. Male participants exhibited lower levels of annoyance with both interfaces, contrary to previously reported findings.

在健康参与者中比较拟人化数字人和基于文本的聊天机器人回答心理健康问题的可用性:随机对照试验
背景近年来,聊天机器人在心理健康支持方面的使用呈指数级增长,研究表明聊天机器人可以有效治疗心理健康问题。最近,人们开始使用被称为 "数字人 "的视觉化身。数字人能够使用面部表情作为人机交互的另一个维度。研究基于文本的聊天机器人和数字人在与心理健康服务互动时在情感反应和可用性偏好方面的差异非常重要:本研究旨在探索数字人界面和纯文本聊天机器人界面在健康参与者测试时的可用性差异。BETSY(行为、情感、治疗系统和你)使用两种不同的界面:具有拟人化特征的数字人和纯文本用户界面。我们还着手探索聊天机器人生成的心理健康对话(针对每种界面)如何影响自我报告的感受和生物特征:我们通过系统可用性量表(System Usability Scale)、脑电图(Electro-encephalography)和亲近感(Feelings of closeness),探讨了具有拟人化特征的数字人与传统纯文字聊天机器人在可用性感知方面的差异。健康参与者(人数=45)被随机分为两组,一组使用具有拟人化特征的数字人(人数=25),另一组使用没有此类特征的纯文本聊天机器人(人数=20)。通过线性回归分析和 t 检验对两组进行比较:纯文本组和数字人组在人口统计学特征方面没有差异。纯文本聊天机器人的系统可用性量表平均得分为 75.34(标准差 10.01;范围 57-90),而数字人机界面的系统可用性量表平均得分为 64.80(标准差 14.14;范围 40-90)。两组用户对各自聊天机器人界面的可用性评分均为平均或高于平均水平。结论:纯文本聊天机器人的易用性一般,而数字人机交互界面的易用性较差:结论:尽管脑电图测量结果没有显著差异,但纯文字聊天机器人的用户友好度明显高于数字人机界面。男性参与者对两种界面的厌烦程度都较低,这与之前报道的结果相反。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Human Factors
JMIR Human Factors Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
3.70%
发文量
123
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信