这是一个警示性的故事,在为智能虚拟代理开发情感表达的同时,进行并排评估

R. Rodrigues, Ricardo Silva, Ricardo Pereira, C. Martinho
{"title":"这是一个警示性的故事,在为智能虚拟代理开发情感表达的同时,进行并排评估","authors":"R. Rodrigues, Ricardo Silva, Ricardo Pereira, C. Martinho","doi":"10.1145/3514197.3549672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When designing interactive scenarios that depend on emotion expression, it is imperative to consider the levels of recognition associated with said expressions, to ascertain whether or not an acceptable degree of emotional communication has been achieved. In this work, two experiments were conducted with that aim, one asking participants to compare two different versions of an application side-by-side when conveying a specific emotion, and another asking the participants to recognize the emotion being expressed in each version. We found that, for some emotions, the approach rated higher in terms of emotion expression during the side-by-side comparison would not translate to the approach with a higher emotion recognition in the second experiment. Although this discrepancy is generally consistent with what happens with emotion recognition in humans, it is noteworthy that some higher-rated choices ended up not being as effective in the expression of emotion. We discuss how these discrepancies might have originated from forced-choice and feature dominance, and why context should be taken into account when designing experiments.","PeriodicalId":149593,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A cautionary tale of side-by-side evaluations while developing emotional expression for intelligent virtual agents\",\"authors\":\"R. Rodrigues, Ricardo Silva, Ricardo Pereira, C. Martinho\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3514197.3549672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When designing interactive scenarios that depend on emotion expression, it is imperative to consider the levels of recognition associated with said expressions, to ascertain whether or not an acceptable degree of emotional communication has been achieved. In this work, two experiments were conducted with that aim, one asking participants to compare two different versions of an application side-by-side when conveying a specific emotion, and another asking the participants to recognize the emotion being expressed in each version. We found that, for some emotions, the approach rated higher in terms of emotion expression during the side-by-side comparison would not translate to the approach with a higher emotion recognition in the second experiment. Although this discrepancy is generally consistent with what happens with emotion recognition in humans, it is noteworthy that some higher-rated choices ended up not being as effective in the expression of emotion. We discuss how these discrepancies might have originated from forced-choice and feature dominance, and why context should be taken into account when designing experiments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":149593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3514197.3549672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 22nd ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3514197.3549672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在设计依赖于情感表达的互动场景时,必须考虑与所述表达相关的识别水平,以确定是否达到了可接受的情感交流程度。在这项工作中,为此目的进行了两个实验,一个要求参与者在传达特定情感时并排比较应用程序的两个不同版本,另一个要求参与者识别每个版本中所表达的情感。我们发现,对于某些情绪,在并行比较中,在情绪表达方面得分较高的方法不会转化为在第二个实验中具有更高情绪识别的方法。尽管这种差异与人类情感识别的情况大体一致,但值得注意的是,一些评分较高的选择最终在表达情感方面没有那么有效。我们讨论了这些差异是如何从强迫选择和特征支配中产生的,以及为什么在设计实验时应该考虑情境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A cautionary tale of side-by-side evaluations while developing emotional expression for intelligent virtual agents
When designing interactive scenarios that depend on emotion expression, it is imperative to consider the levels of recognition associated with said expressions, to ascertain whether or not an acceptable degree of emotional communication has been achieved. In this work, two experiments were conducted with that aim, one asking participants to compare two different versions of an application side-by-side when conveying a specific emotion, and another asking the participants to recognize the emotion being expressed in each version. We found that, for some emotions, the approach rated higher in terms of emotion expression during the side-by-side comparison would not translate to the approach with a higher emotion recognition in the second experiment. Although this discrepancy is generally consistent with what happens with emotion recognition in humans, it is noteworthy that some higher-rated choices ended up not being as effective in the expression of emotion. We discuss how these discrepancies might have originated from forced-choice and feature dominance, and why context should be taken into account when designing experiments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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