Impertinent mobiles - Effects of politeness and impoliteness in human-smartphone interaction

Carolus, Astrid; Muench, Ricardo; Schmidt, Catharina; Schneider, Florian

doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.030

Cited by 38 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In consequence, social processes and scripts of human-to-human communication are triggered, as in the cooperation principle (Grice 1975 ; see section “Social Representations, Social Schemata, and Collaboration Scripts”). This applies to conventional computers as well as newer technologies like smartphones (Carolus et al 2019 ). Despite the change in knowledge and experience of media users, the advance of technology, and the change of human-computer interaction (Gambino et al 2020 ), current research implies that humans, for example, a learner who gains knowledge from a multimedia learning environment, can interpret the interaction with technology as a social event even if no other actual humans are present (Xu and Lombard 2016 ).…”

Section: Fundamental Theories On Social Processes In Digital Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a long time, research on individuals learning in digital environments was primarily based on cognitive-oriented theories. This paper aims at providing evidence that social processes affect individual learning with digital materials. Based on these theories and empirical results, a social-processes-augmented theory is suggested: the Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE). This CASTLE postulates that social cues in digital materials activate social schemata in learners leading to enhanced (para-)social, motivational, emotional, and metacognitive processes. To substantiate this theory, socio-cognitive theories are used, which predict social influences on learning with digital materials. Besides, previous empirical findings are presented assuming that with a rising number of social cues in digital materials, the influence of social processes increases. Finally, consequences regarding the design of digital learning media are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Fundamental Theories On Social Processes In Digital Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The computers as social actors (CASA) literature argues that when computers mimic humans by demonstrating social cues, people automatically and unconsciously act as though they were interacting with other humans, rather than cognitively determine how they should respond differently (Nass & Moon, 2000 ; Reeves & Nass, 1996 ). Although users are aware that a computer agent is neither human nor deserving of human‐like treatment, they respond to it as a real person, without consciously intending to do so (Carolus et al, 2019 ; Reeves & Nass, 1996 ). For instance, Nowak and Biocca ( 2003 ) found that avatars and agents evoke similar levels of perceived copresence, social presence, and telepresence.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human versus chatbot: Understanding the role of emotion in health marketing communication for vaccines

Tsai

Lun

Carcioppolo

et al. 2021

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the theoretical framework of agency effect, this study examined the role of affect in influencing the effects of chatbot versus human brand representatives in the context of health marketing communication about HPV vaccines. We conducted a 2 (perceived agency: chatbot vs. human) × 3 (affect elicitation: embarrassment, anger, neutral) between‐subject lab experiment with 142 participants, who were randomly assigned to interact with either a perceived chatbot or a human representative. Key findings from self‐reported and behavioral data highlight the complexity of consumer–chatbot communication. Specifically, participants reported lower interaction satisfaction with the chatbot than with the human representative when anger was evoked. However, participants were more likely to disclose concerns of HPV risks and provide more elaborate answers to the perceived human representative when embarrassment was elicited. Overall, the chatbot performed comparably to the human representative in terms of perceived usefulness and influence over participants' compliance intention in all emotional contexts. The findings complement the Computers as Social Actors paradigm and offer strategic guidelines to capitalize on the relative advantages of chatbot versus human representatives.

show abstract

“…Their empirical studies revealed that users tend to (unconsciously) interpret cues sent by computers as social indicators of a human counterpart to 'whom' they react accordingly. Literature provides various explanations for this phenomenon with the evolutionary perspective offering a framing theoretical perspective (Nass et al, 1997;Nass and Gong, 2000;Kraemer et al, 2015;Carolus et al, 2019a). Like our bodies, the human brain is adapted to our early ancestors' world in which every entity one perceived was a real physical object and every entity communicating as a human being sure enough was a human being (Buss and Kenrick, 1998).…”

Section: Talking Technology: Conversational Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additional studies revealed further indication of gender stereotyping (Lee et al, 2000;Lee and Nass, 2002;Morishima et al, 2002) and further social norms and rules to be applied to computers, e.g., politeness (Nass et al, 1999) or group membership (Nass et al, 1996). More recently, studies transferred this paradigm to more recent technology (Carolus et al, 2018;Carolus et al, 2019a). Rosenthal-von der Puetten et al (2013) widened the focus and analyzed observers' empathetic reactions toward a dinosaur robot (Ugobe's Pleo).…”

Section: Talking Technology: Conversational Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Alexa, I feel for you!’ Observers’ Empathetic Reactions towards a Conversational Agent

Carolus

Wienrich²,

Törke

et al. 2021

Front. Comput. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conversational agents and smart speakers have grown in popularity offering a variety of options for use, which are available through intuitive speech operation. In contrast to the standard dyad of a single user and a device, voice-controlled operations can be observed by further attendees resulting in new, more social usage scenarios. Referring to the concept of ‘media equation’ and to research on the idea of ‘computers as social actors,’ which describes the potential of technology to trigger emotional reactions in users, this paper asks for the capacity of smart speakers to elicit empathy in observers of interactions. In a 2 × 2 online experiment, 140 participants watched a video of a man talking to an Amazon Echo either rudely or neutrally (factor 1), addressing it as ‘Alexa’ or ‘Computer’ (factor 2). Controlling for participants’ trait empathy, the rude treatment results in participants’ significantly higher ratings of empathy with the device, compared to the neutral treatment. The form of address had no significant effect. Results were independent of the participants’ gender and usage experience indicating a rather universal effect, which confirms the basic idea of the media equation. Implications for users, developers and researchers were discussed in the light of (future) omnipresent voice-based technology interaction scenarios.

show abstract

Impertinent mobiles - Effects of politeness and impoliteness in human-smartphone interaction

Cited by 38 publications

References 32 publications

The Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE)

The Cognitive-Affective-Social Theory of Learning in digital Environments (CASTLE)

Human versus chatbot: Understanding the role of emotion in health marketing communication for vaccines

‘Alexa, I feel for you!’ Observers’ Empathetic Reactions towards a Conversational Agent

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About