Detecting communicative intent in a computerised test of joint attention

Caruana, Nathan; McArthur, Genevieve; Woolgar, Alexandra; Brock, Jon

doi:10.7717/peerj.2899

“…These two examples contrast extreme effects of visual input (on the clifftop) and topdown instructions (on the computer game), but the same principles can be seen in other scenarios. In a recent study, participants saw a virtual character (VC) and could interact with it via eye movements (Caruana, McArthur, Woolgar, & Brock, 2017). Participants who were instructed that the character's behaviour was driven by a person in an adjacent room showed different patterns of gaze and reported a different subjective experience, compared to those who were instructed that the character was driven by an algorithm.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding dual realities and more in VR

Pan

¹

,

Hamilton²

2018

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We have used this task in previous studies but without the agency manipulation. In other 148 words, all participants believed that they were interacting with a real person ( Manuscript to be reviewed 155 makes a single eye-movement on each trial (Caruana et al, 2017b). This suggests that an 156 important part of the joint attention task is determining whether a shift in eye gaze is intended to 157 be communicative or not.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review #2 of "Human agency beliefs influence behaviour during virtual social interactions (v0.2)"

Georgescu¹

2017

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, with the emergence of relatively inexpensive and accessible virtual reality technologies, it is now possible to deliver compelling and realistic simulations of human-tohuman interaction. Neuroimaging studies have shown that, when participants believe they are interacting via a virtual interface with another human agent, they show different patterns of brain activity compared to when they know that their virtual partner is computer-controlled. The suggestion is that users adopt an "intentional stance" by attributing mental states to their virtual partner. However, it remains unclear how beliefs in the agency of a virtual partner influence participants' behaviour and subjective experience of the interaction. We investigated this issue in the context of a cooperative "joint attention" game in which participants interacted via an eye tracker with a virtual onscreen partner, directing each other's eye gaze to different screen locations. Half of the participants were correctly informed that their partner was controlled by a computer algorithm ("Computer" condition). The other half were misled into believing that the virtual character was controlled by a second participant in another room ("Human" condition). Those in the "Human" condition were slower to make eye contact with their partner and more likely to try and guide their partner before they had established mutual eye contact than participants in the "Computer" condition. They also responded more rapidly when their partner was guiding them, although the same effect was also found for a control condition in which they responded to an arrow cue. Results confirm the influence of human agency beliefs on behaviour in this virtual social interaction context. They further suggest that researchers and developers attempting to simulate social interactions should consider the impact of agency beliefs on user experience in other social contexts, and their effect on the achievement of the application's goals. Abstract18 In recent years, with the emergence of relatively inexpensive and accessible virtual reality 19 technologies, it is now possible to deliver compelling and realistic simulations of human-to-20 human interaction. Neuroimaging studies have shown that, when participants believe they are 21 interacting via a virtual interface with another human agent, they show different patterns of brain 22 activity compared to when they know that their virtual partner is computer-controlled. The 23 suggestion is that users adopt an "intentional stance" by attributing mental states to their virtual 24 partner. However, it remains unclear how beliefs in the agency of a virtual partner influence 25 participants' behaviour and subjective experience of the interaction. We investigated this issue in 26 the context of a cooperative "joint attention" game in which participants interacted via an eye 27 tracker with a virtual onscreen partner, directing each other's eye gaze to different screen 28 locations. Half of the participants were correctly informed that their partn...

show abstract

“…Response times to this eye gaze cue are consistently longer than for the 148 equivalent arrow cue in the control (RJAc) condition. Importantly, this effect is reduced when 149 the search phase is removed from the task so that the virtual partner only makes a single eye-150 movement during the trial (Caruana et al, 2017b). This suggests that an important part of 151 joint attention is determining whether a cue, such as a shift in eye gaze, is intended to be 152 communicative or not.…”

Section: States? 81mentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

Supplemental Information 2: R Markdown of Data Analysis Pipeline and Results

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, with the emergence of relatively inexpensive and accessible virtual reality technologies, it is now possible to deliver compelling and realistic simulations of human-tohuman interaction. Neuroimaging studies have shown that, when participants believe they are interacting via a virtual interface with another human agent, they show different patterns of brain activity compared to when they know that their virtual partner is computer-controlled. The suggestion is that users adopt an "intentional stance" by attributing mental states to their virtual partner. However, it remains unclear how beliefs in the agency of a virtual partner influence participants' behaviour and subjective experience of the interaction. We investigated this issue in the context of a cooperative "joint attention" game in which participants interacted via an eye tracker with a virtual onscreen partner, directing each other's eye gaze to different screen locations. Half of the participants were correctly informed that their partner was controlled by a computer algorithm ("Computer" condition). The other half were misled into believing that the virtual character was controlled by a second participant in another room ("Human" condition).Those in the "Human" condition were slower to make eye contact with their partner and more likely to try and guide their partner before they had established mutual eye contact than participants in the "Computer" condition. They also responded more rapidly when their partner was guiding them, although the same effect was also found for a control condition in which they responded to an arrow cue. Results confirm the influence of human agency beliefs on behaviour in this virtual social interaction context. They further suggest that researchers and developers attempting to simulate social interactions should consider the impact of agency beliefs on user experience in other social contexts, and their effect on the achievement of the application's goals.PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3018v1 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access |

show abstract

Detecting communicative intent in a computerised test of joint attention

Cited by 23 publications

References 37 publications

Understanding dual realities and more in VR

Understanding dual realities and more in VR

Peer Review #2 of "Human agency beliefs influence behaviour during virtual social interactions (v0.2)"

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About