“I Can’t Reply with That”: Characterizing Problematic Email Reply Suggestions

Ronald E. Robertson, Alexandra Olteanu, Fernando Diaz, Milad Shokouhi, P. Bailey
{"title":"“I Can’t Reply with That”: Characterizing Problematic Email Reply Suggestions","authors":"Ronald E. Robertson, Alexandra Olteanu, Fernando Diaz, Milad Shokouhi, P. Bailey","doi":"10.1145/3411764.3445557","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In email interfaces, providing users with reply suggestions may simplify or accelerate correspondence. While the “success” of such systems is typically quantified using the number of suggestions selected by users, this ignores the impact of social context, which can change how suggestions are perceived. To address this, we developed a mixed-methods framework involving qualitative interviews and crowdsourced experiments to characterize problematic email reply suggestions. Our interviews revealed issues with over-positive, dissonant, cultural, and gender-assuming replies, as well as contextual politeness. In our experiments, crowdworkers assessed email scenarios that we generated and systematically controlled, showing that contextual factors like social ties and the presence of salutations impacts users’ perceptions of email correspondence. These assessments created a novel dataset of human-authored corrections for problematic email replies. Our study highlights the social complexity of providing suggestions for email correspondence, raising issues that may apply to all social messaging systems.","PeriodicalId":20451,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445557","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

In email interfaces, providing users with reply suggestions may simplify or accelerate correspondence. While the “success” of such systems is typically quantified using the number of suggestions selected by users, this ignores the impact of social context, which can change how suggestions are perceived. To address this, we developed a mixed-methods framework involving qualitative interviews and crowdsourced experiments to characterize problematic email reply suggestions. Our interviews revealed issues with over-positive, dissonant, cultural, and gender-assuming replies, as well as contextual politeness. In our experiments, crowdworkers assessed email scenarios that we generated and systematically controlled, showing that contextual factors like social ties and the presence of salutations impacts users’ perceptions of email correspondence. These assessments created a novel dataset of human-authored corrections for problematic email replies. Our study highlights the social complexity of providing suggestions for email correspondence, raising issues that may apply to all social messaging systems.
“我不能回复”:描述有问题的邮件回复建议
在电子邮件界面中,为用户提供回复建议可以简化或加快通信。虽然这类系统的“成功”通常是通过用户选择的建议数量来量化的,但这忽略了社会背景的影响,而社会背景可能会改变建议的感知方式。为了解决这个问题,我们开发了一个混合方法框架,包括定性访谈和众包实验,以表征有问题的电子邮件回复建议。我们的采访揭示了过度积极、不和谐、文化和性别假设的回答以及上下文礼貌的问题。在我们的实验中,众包工作者评估了我们生成并系统控制的电子邮件场景,结果显示,社会关系和称呼等背景因素会影响用户对电子邮件通信的看法。这些评估为有问题的电子邮件回复创建了一个新的人工更正数据集。我们的研究强调了为电子邮件通信提供建议的社会复杂性,提出了可能适用于所有社交信息系统的问题。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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