The DOI matches its Crossref record; 118 of the 124 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 79 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda
Open accessAbstract
Chatbots are increasingly becoming important gateways to digital services and information—taken up within domains such as customer service, health, education, and work support. However, there is only limited knowledge concerning the impact of chatbots at the individual, group, and societal level. Furthermore, a number of challenges remain to be resolved before the potential of chatbots can be fully realized. In response, chatbots have emerged as a substantial research area in recent years. To help advance knowledge in this emerging research area, we propose a research agenda in the form of future directions and challenges to be addressed by chatbot research. This proposal consolidates years of discussions at the CONVERSATIONS workshop series on chatbot research. Following a deliberative research analysis process among the workshop participants, we explore future directions within six topics of interest: (a) users and implications, (b) user experience and design, (c) frameworks and platforms, (d) chatbots for collaboration, (e) democratizing chatbots, and (f) ethics and privacy. For each of these topics, we provide a brief overview of the state of the art, discuss key research challenges, and suggest promising directions for future research. The six topics are detailed with a 5-year perspective in mind and are to be considered items of an interdisciplinary research agenda produced collaboratively by avid researchers in the field.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper proposes an interdisciplinary 5-year research agenda for chatbot research, distilled from the CONVERSATIONS workshop series and organized into six topics: users and implications; user experience and design; frameworks and platforms; chatbots for collaboration; democratizing chatbots; and ethics and privacy. It argues that chatbot research is fragmented across disciplines and offers future directions and challenges for each topic.
Key findings
- The agenda identifies six topics and two proposed future directions per topic (Table 1): emerging chatbot user groups and behaviours, social implications of chatbots; design for improving chatbot UX, modelling/evaluating chatbot UX; interpretation capabilities/context understanding, emerging techniques for design/testing; modelling human–chatbot collaboration, empirical investigations of it; chatbots for social good, inclusive design with/for diverse user groups; understanding chatbot ethics/privacy, ethics by design.
- The CONVERSATIONS 2020 workshop involved about 150 registered participants from more than 30 countries and 80 different organizations, including more than 20 paper presentations; the 2017 workshop had approximately half of 30 participants identify/cluster key challenges, and the 2019 workshop revisited topics through in-depth group discussions involving approximately half of 50 participants.
- The paper reports that in 2019 over 50% of US and German consumers were estimated to have used chatbots at least once, with even higher numbers in the UK or France; it also notes GPT-3 uses 175 billion parameters and was estimated to cost 12 million US dollars to train.
- It identifies research challenges including fragmentation across disciplines/application areas, lack of common definitions, metrics and validated scales for chatbot evaluations, scarce models/theories of human–chatbot collaboration, and limited ethics/privacy research specific to conversational user interfaces.
Methods
- Design: a collaborative, deliberative research agenda developed through the CONVERSATIONS workshop series (2017–2020), explicitly contrasted with a mapping study or systematic literature review.
- Data/sample: workshop participants and group discussions; in 2019, participants were assigned to six topic groups and worked in two sessions across the 2-day workshop, with output presented to plenary; the 2020 workshop had about 150 registered participants from more than 30 countries and 80 organizations.
- Analysis: groups discussed each topic in a 5-year frame, identifying relevant state of the art, key research challenges, and future directions; the process extended across the following year and incorporated CONVERSATIONS 2020 contributions.
Limitations
- Stated: the findings are based on discussions at the CONVERSATIONS workshop and mainly involve researchers from European organizations; the authors assume broad international relevance but say this should be tested through discussion.
- Stated: topics, state-of-the-art, and research challenges may have been omitted, and the set of topics/directions needs regular updating; for ethics, the authors note other directions could be possible and equally relevant.
- Evident: the paper is a consensus-based agenda rather than a systematic review or empirical study, so its coverage and prioritization reflect the workshop participants and deliberative process rather than a comprehensive evidence synthesis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 79 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there is only limited knowledge concerning the impact of chatbots at the individual, group, and societal level.”
- Also stated in: § Users and implications · hedged
“Chatbot impact on society has, however, not been comprehensively researched and only tentatively been suggested in studies of chatbots for specific domains—as mentioned above.”
- Also stated in: § Users and implications · plain
“Implications of chatbot use entail a range of exciting research challenges, as knowledge is needed on how the uptake of chatbots may impact groups, organizations, businesses, and society at large.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Abstract
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- The authors state this as an assumption: The substantial impact of chatbots on the level of organizations and society is assumed to be seen in the future more so than the present.
- Also stated in: § Users and implications · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This broad emerging knowledge base is valuable, but also implies that research of relevance to chatbots is currently fragmented across disciplines and application domains.”
- Also stated in: § Objective: to propose future research directions · plain
“While there is a rapidly expanding body of knowledge relevant to chatbot research, rooted in long-standing research fields, current research and knowledge are fragmented across disciplines, application areas, and communities.”
- Also stated in: § Research communities · plain
“Research related to chatbots is also conducted in multiple communities with varying degrees of exchange among them.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Introduction
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Objective: to propose future research directions · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In consequence, knowledge on chatbot use has been gathered for a range of contexts—in the private sphere [87], at work [74], and in public spaces [17].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Users and implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [87] Porcheron M, Fischer JE, Reeves S, Sharples S (2018) Voice interfaces in everyday life. In: Proceedings of CHI 2018 (paper no. 640). ACM,New York source
- Not checked yetcites [74] Liao QV, Mas-ud Hussain M, Chandar P, Davis M, Khazaeni Y, Crasso MP, Geyer W (2018) All work and no play? In Proceedings of CHI 2018 (paper no. 3). ACM,New York source
- Not checked yetcites [17] Candello H, Pinhanez C, Pichiliani M, Cavalin P, Figueiredo F, Vasconcelos M, Carmo DH (2019) The effect of audiences on the user experience with conversational interfaces in physical spaces. In: Proceedings of CHI 2019 (paper no. 90). ACM, New York source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A substantial body of research of relevance for chatbot use has been developed within broad domains such as health [105], education [84], and business [8], as well as more specific application domains such as polling [62], information search [73], libraries [92], and museums [64].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Users and implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [105] Vaidyam AN, Wisniewski H, Halamka JD, Kashavan MS, Torous JB (2019) Chatbots and conversational agents in mental health: a review of the psychiatric landscape. Can J Psychiatry 64(7):456–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743719828977 source
- Not checked yetcites [84] Pérez JQ, Daradoumis T, Puig JMM (2020) Rediscovering the use of chatbots in education: a systematic literature review. Comput Appl Eng Educ 28(6):1549–1565 source
- Not checked yetcites [8] Bavaresco R, Silveira D, Reis E, Barbosa J, Righi R, Costa C, Moreira C (2020) Conversational agents in business: a systematic literature review and future research directions. Comput Sci Rev 36:100239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100239 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“Because of this, we have substantial knowledge on potential and actual chatbot users and implications for individuals across a wide variety of contexts, building upon a rich stream of research dating back to the work of Weizenbaum [112].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Users and implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [112] Weizenbaum J (1967) Contextual understanding by computers. Commun ACM 10(8):474–480 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“While there is a large number of studies on chatbot user experience available, there is a lack of common definitions, metrics and validated scales for key aspects of chatbot evaluations [63].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63] Kocaballi AB, Laranjo L, Coiera E (2019) Understanding and measuring user experience in conversational interfaces. Interact Comput 31(2):192–207 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also a growing base of research to inform design of chatbot interactions, whether this concerns conversational design [6], personalization of chatbots [69], the use of interactive elements in chatbots [57], or the use of social cues to indicate social status and capabilities [32].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6] Ashktorab Z, Jain M, Liao QV, Weisz JD (2019) Resilient chatbots: repair strategy preferences for conversational breakdowns. In: Proceedings of CHI 2019 (paper no. 254). ACM, New York source
- Not checked yetcites [69] Laban G, Araujo T (2020) The effect of personalization techniques in users’ perceptions of conversational recommender system. In: IVA ’20: Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on intelligent virtual agents (paper no. 34). ACM, New York source
- Not checked yetcites [57] Jain M, Kumar P, Kota R, Patel SN (2018) Evaluating and informing the design of chatbots. In: Proceedings of the 2018 designing interactive systems conference. ACM, New York, pp 895–906 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesNone of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is also a grown body of knowledge on methods and measures for evaluating chatbot user experience.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, while a broad range of approaches are employed there is a lack of commonly applied approaches to evaluation.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While there is a growing body of research available on chatbot user experience there still is a lack of knowledge on how to leverage the findings from this research in chatbot designs that consistently delight and engage users.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- Probably not a substantial claim. 62
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
In the paper
“In response, chatbots have emerged as a substantial research area in recent years.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
“There has lately been a marked increase of interest in chatbot research within academia and industry, specifically from 2016 and onwards [86].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [86] Piccolo LS, Mensio M, Alani H (2018) Chasing the chatbots. In Internet Science. INSCI 2018 international workshops. Springer, Cham, pp 157–169 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rapidly growing body of chatbot research has a marked interdisciplinary character—spanning fields such as informatics, management and marketing, media and communication science, linguistics and philosophy, psychology and sociology, engineering, design, and human-computer interaction.”
- Also stated in: § Research communities · boosted
“Chatbot research is currently evolving within and across a range of disciplines and has a strong interdisciplinary character.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Introduction
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Research communities · boosted
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This has helped identify factors contributing to positive or negative user experience [118] and has addressed specific aspects such as trust [119], perceived social support [71], human likeness [4], and how these aspects are impacted by chatbot design [42].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [118] Zarouali B, Van den Broeck E, Walrave M, Poels K (2018) Predicting consumer responses to a chatbot on Facebook. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 21(8):491–497 source
- Not checked yetcites [119] Zierau N, Engel C, Söllner M, Leimeister JM (2020) Trust in smart personal assistants: A systematic literature review and development of a research agenda. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik—WI2020. Association for Information Systems,pp 99–11 source
- Not checked yetcites [71] Lee S, Choi J (2017) Enhancing user experience with conversational agent for movie recommendation: effects of self-disclosure and reciprocity. Int J Hum Comput Stud 103:95–105 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Users still experience issues in chatbot interaction, both in terms of pragmatic experiences—where chatbots fail to understand or to help users achieve their intended goals [75]—and in terms of hedonic experiences—where chatbots fail to engage users over time [117].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75] Luger E, Sellen A (2016) “Like having a really bad PA”—the gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In: Proceedings of CHI 2016. ACM, New York, pp 5286–5297 source
- Not checked yetcites [117] Zamora J (2017) I’m sorry, Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that: Chatbot perception and expectations. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on human agent Interaction. ACM,New York,pp 253–260 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chatbot user experience has been a key theme in recent research efforts, for voice-based virtual agents [75] and text-based applications [4].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75] Luger E, Sellen A (2016) “Like having a really bad PA”—the gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In: Proceedings of CHI 2016. ACM, New York, pp 5286–5297 source
- Not checked yetcites [4] Araujo T (2018) Living up to the chatbot hype: the influence of anthropomorphic design cues and communicative agency framing on conversational agent and company perceptions. Comput Hum Behav 85:183–189 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Through the CONVERSATIONS workshop series, six overarching topics for future chatbot research have been identified.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evaluation in chatbot research is conducted by instruments for users' self reports of user experience [63], through user observation and interviews [75] and analyses of chatbot interaction [66], and also by physiological measurements [22].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot user experience and design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63] Kocaballi AB, Laranjo L, Coiera E (2019) Understanding and measuring user experience in conversational interfaces. Interact Comput 31(2):192–207 source
- Not checked yetcites [75] Luger E, Sellen A (2016) “Like having a really bad PA”—the gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In: Proceedings of CHI 2016. ACM, New York, pp 5286–5297 source
- Not checked yetcites [66] Kvale K, Sell OA, Hodnebrog S, Følstad A (2019) Improving conversations: lessons learnt from manual analysis of chatbot dialogues. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop CONVERSATIONS 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 187–200 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While we have substantial knowledge on current chatbot users, important topics lack sufficient coverage. Two warrant particular mention: (a) broader chatbot uses and user groups and (b) implications of chatbot use, both detailed below.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Users and implications
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chatbots are increasingly becoming important gateways to digital services and information—taken up within domains such as customer service, health, education, and work support.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
“Chatbots are currently taken up in application areas as diverse as customer service [1], health [105], education [53], and office work [78].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Adam M, Wessel M, Benlian A (2020) AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance. Electron Markets. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7 source
- Not checked yetcites [105] Vaidyam AN, Wisniewski H, Halamka JD, Kashavan MS, Torous JB (2019) Chatbots and conversational agents in mental health: a review of the psychiatric landscape. Can J Psychiatry 64(7):456–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743719828977 source
- Not checked yetcites [53] Hobert S, Berens F (2019) Small talk conversations and the long-term use of chatbots in educational settings–experiences from a field study. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop CONVERSATIONS 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 260–272 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
In the paper
“For example, in 2019, over 50 % of US and German consumers were estimated to have used chatbots at least once—with even higher numbers in the UK or France [88].”
- Also stated in: § Users and implications · plain
“Chatbot use is becoming commonplace.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Users and implications
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88] Press G (2019) AI Stats News: 62 % of US Consumers like using chatbots to interact with businesses. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/gilpress/2019/10/25/ai-stats-news-us-consumers-interest-in-using-chatbots-to-interact-with-businesses-rise-to-62/
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Users and implications · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we lack the needed technological underpinnings to support some key aspects of chatbot applications.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“it is promising to see that general guidelines for human-AI interaction are emerging [3] and more of these are needed.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Amershi S, Weld D, Vorvoreanu M, Fourney A, Nushi B, Collisson P, Teevan J (2019) Guidelines for human–AI interaction. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2019 (paper no. 3). ACM, New York source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the current research on chatbots typically addresses dyadic interactions between one chatbot and one user”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“along with high-quality open-source libraries [113] have lowered the barrier to entry and make it possible to build conversational models that exhibit high generalization and coherence [90].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [113] Wolf T, Debut L, Sanh V, Chaumond J, Delangue C, Moi A, Cistac P, Rault T, Louf R, Funtowicz M, Brew J (2019) HuggingFace’s transformers: state-of-the-art natural language processing. arXiv preprint, arxiv:1910.03771 source
- Not checked yetcites [90] Roller S, Dinan E, Goyal N, Ju D, Williamson M, Liu Y, Boureau YL (2020) Recipes for building an open-domain chatbot. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2004.13637 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The advances in chatbot frameworks and platforms are key enablers of the current interest in chatbot applications.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is an essential challenge in studying and designing chatbots for collaboration due to the multifaceted character of such interaction, and the range of potential theoretical perspectives to apply.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“human-chatbot teams which handle challenging service queries better than chatbots alone and more efficiently than humans alone.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [45] Grudin J, Jacques R (2019) Chatbots, humbots, and the quest for artificial general intelligence. In: Proceedings of CHI 2019 (paper no. 209). ACM, New York source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“further progress in the field of chatbots will depend on advances in natural language understanding, which will remain a key area of research interest.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“criticism around large models has been growing lately [9], especially ethical concerns regarding undesirable and often inscrutable societal biases percolating the models [9, 120], carbon footprint [9, 99], misuse and misinterpretation [9], privatization of AI research [99], and even research opportunity costs [49].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Bender EM, Gebru T, McMillan-Major A, Mitchell M (2021) On the dangers of stochastic parrots: can language models be too big? In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. ACM, New York, pp 610–623 source
- Not checked yetcites [120] Zou J, Schiebinger L (2018) AI can be sexist and racist—it’s time to make it fair. Nature 559:324–326 source
- Not checked yetcites [99] Strubell E, Ganesh A, McCallum A (2019) Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1906.02243 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The deliberative process at the workshop series was key to identify and propose research directions in a true interdisciplinary fashion.”
- Also stated in: § Approach · plain
“As a result, the proposed research directions reflect the interdisciplinary position of a group of collaborating researchers within this emerging field.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Approach
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § Approach · plain
In the paper
“the introduction of the Transformer [107] as a dominant and highly effective architecture for natural language processing”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. In: Conference on neural information processing systems—NIPS 2017, pp 5998–6008
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the use of generative approaches has seen substantial progress, where end-to-end dialogue systems are applied to predict suitable responses to user input based on models built from large conversational datasets [2, 109].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] Adiwardana D, Luong MT, So DR, Hall J, Fiedel N, Thoppilan R, Le QV (2020) Towards a human-like open-domain chatbot. arXiv preprint. arXiv:2001.09977
- Not checked yetcites [109] Vinyals O, Le Q (2015) A neural conversational model. arXiv preprint, arXiv:1506.05869
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, challenges remain in solutions for supporting chatbot development and standardised testing for example in terms of studies simulating production environments and approaches to improve chatbots more easily in production.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, opening up these powerful models to the public has the potential to accelerate chatbot development even further.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Key advances include the application of supervised machine learning for classification and information retrieval—enabling, for example, intent prediction and identification of user sentiment [20], which are critical to support task-oriented conversations.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbot frameworks and platforms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Chen H, Liu X, Yin D, Tang J (2017) A survey on dialogue systems: recent advances and new frontiers. ACM SIGKDD Explor Newsl 19(2):25–35 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“voice-based conversational agents have been shown to more easily interpret particular English dialects potentially reducing their utility for users of specific areas [51]”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Harwell D (2018) The accent gap. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/business/alexa-does-not-understand-your-accent/
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Current efforts are already moving in that direction, providing development resources that promise anyone with enough motivation, regardless of their background, to deliver human-like interactive experiences.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chatbots will both raise critical ethical challenges and hold implications for democratization of technology”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we foresee that chatbots in collaborative relations involving more people and bots will become more prominent as chatbots mature further.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“According to these guidelines, it is of paramount importance for trustworthy AI to be aligned with (a) legal regulations and (b) ethical principles and values, and also (c) be robust from a technical perspective given its particular social context.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] European Commission (2019) Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Retrieved from: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chatbots have been suggested as accessible interactive systems for visually impaired in need of an easily navigable user interface [7], as conversational support for users with special needs [19], and to support youth to engage in societal issues [110].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Baez M, Daniel F, Casati F (2019) Conversational web interaction: proposal of a dialog-based natural language interaction paradigm for the Web. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop, CONVERSATIONS. Springer, Cham, pp 94–11 source
- Not checked yetcites [19] Catania F, Di Nardo N, Garzotto F, Occhiuto D (2019) Emoty: an emotionally sensitive conversational agent for people with neurodevelopmental disorders. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Scholar Space, Honolulu, pp 2014–2023 source
- Not checked yetcites [110] Väänänen K, Hiltunen A, Varsaluoma J, Pietilä I (2019) CivicBots–Chatbots for supporting youth in societal participation. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop CONVERSATIONS 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 143–157 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“based on the advice of a high-level expert group on AI, a European set of ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI has been presented [30].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] European Commission (2019) Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Retrieved from: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This concern for ethics in AI is motivated by its disruptive character and potential for changes in the job market and misuse by malevolent actors, as well as issues pertaining to accountability and bias [58].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] McTear MF (2002) Spoken dialogue technology: enabling the conversational user interface. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 34(1):90–169 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while available platforms and frameworks are promoted as low-threshold means of chatbot design and development, there is a lack of knowledge regarding how these are actually employed to democratize chatbot development and design.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“tasks assigned to chatbots in these collaborative interactions can vary in complexity and involvement.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such tasks can be as simple as providing individual notifications, or as complicated as communicating processed and analysed data to different stakeholders.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“a proposed European set of regulations for AI, the AI Act, will help strengthen aspects of ethical concern in AI systems, including legal requirements for human oversight, accuracy, robustness, and security.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“as noted in a review of the chatbot literature, there has been an initial lack of ethical discussion in chatbot research [102]—though noteworthy exceptions to this exist, such as the exploration of ethical and social considerations for conversational AI by Ruane et al. [91].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [102] Syvänen S, Valentini C (2020) Conversational agents in online organization–stakeholder interactions: a state-of-the-art analysis and implications for further research. J Commun Manag 339–362 source
- Not checked yetcites [91] Ruane E, Birhane A, Ventresque A (2019) Conversational AI: social and ethical considerations. In: Proceedings for the 27th AIAI Irish conference on artificial intelligence and cognitive science—AICS 2019, pp 104–115. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol-2563. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2563/
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Twitter bots utilizing COVID-19 content to spread political conspiracies [34]”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34] Ferrara E (2020) What types of COVID-19 conspiracies are populated by Twitter bots? First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i6.10633 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“due to technological limitations and design choices, they can be the means to perpetuate and even reinforce existing biases in society, exclude or discriminate against some user groups (e.g. [33, 51]) and over-represent or enshrine specific values”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [33] Feine J, Gnewuch U, Morana S, Maedche A (2019b) Gender bias in chatbot design. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop CONVERSATIONS 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 79–93 source
- Not checked yetcites [51] Harwell D (2018) The accent gap. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/business/alexa-does-not-understand-your-accent/
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“By allowing simple natural language dialogues, chatbots are potentially a low-threshold means to access information and services and may as such serve to bridge digital divides and strengthen inclusion [14].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] Brandtzaeg PB, Følstad A (2017) Why people use chatbots. In: Proceeedings of the international conference on internet science—INSCI 2017. Springer, Cham, pp 377–392 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“AI has recently been the objective of substantial interest from policy-making and regulatory bodies, as well as in discussions and reflections on ethics, privacy management and trust [21].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21] Chung H, Iorga M, Voas J, Lee S (2017) Alexa, can I trust you? Computer 50(9):100–104 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is now used to govern privacy in technology-based systems and services.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“consequently are a potential low threshold means to access information and services and promote inclusion”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Chatbots permit users to interact through natural language.
In the paper
“The aim of using chatbots for strengthening democratization, reducing bias, and facilitating universal design has been included in the vision of chatbots for social good [40]”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [40] Følstad A, Brandtzaeg PB, Feltwell T, Law ELC, Tscheligi M, Luger E (2018) Chatbots for social good. In: Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (paper no. SIG06). ACM, New York
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“While this problem of human–machine collaboration is addressed in more generic terms, for example in actor-network theory [70], there is a lack of models to characterize conversational collaboration involving agents.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [70] Latour B (2005) Reassembling the Social - An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“From these principles, the European Commission expert group has identified seven key requirements for ethical AI applications, including human agency and oversight, privacy and data governance, and diversity, non-discrimination, and fairness.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] European Commission (2019) Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Retrieved from: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the conversational character of chatbots may conceivably introduce a range of specific ethical problems, for example the ethical implications of human-like and socially present chatbot interaction, issues of consent, the privacy implications of third-party interactions and the implications of emotional effect on children and vulnerable users.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chatbots will both raise critical ethical challenges and hold implications for democratization of technology”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there is a lack of more systematic or structured investigations of universal and inclusive design of chatbots.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“the general trend of deploying bots in large scale for political interference and influence [44]”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] Gorwa R, Guilbeault D (2020) Unpacking the social media bot: a typology to guide research and policy. Policy Internet 12(2):225–248 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Human–chatbot collaboration is foreseen as an increasingly important aspect of chatbot research and applications.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chatbots may improve access to health care services (e.g. [105]) and support health-promoting behavior change (e.g. [85]), and supplement educational programs [53].”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [105] Vaidyam AN, Wisniewski H, Halamka JD, Kashavan MS, Torous JB (2019) Chatbots and conversational agents in mental health: a review of the psychiatric landscape. Can J Psychiatry 64(7):456–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0706743719828977 source
- Not checked yetcites [85] Perski O, Crane D, Beard E, Brown J (2019) Does the addition of a supportive chatbot promote user engagement with a smoking cessation app? An experimental study. Digital Health 5:2055207619880676 source
- Not checked yetcites [53] Hobert S, Berens F (2019) Small talk conversations and the long-term use of chatbots in educational settings–experiences from a field study. In: Chatbot research and design. Third international workshop CONVERSATIONS 2019. Springer, Cham, pp 260–272 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is a large and growing body of ethical and privacy knowledge to draw on, and an emerging set of guidelines and regulations on ethics and privacy for digital systems in general, and AI-based systems in particular.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“some studies highlighted critical aspects in using chatbots since they may sustain and even strengthen existing biases in society.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, to our knowledge, there is a lack of research on the usability, accessibility, and effectiveness of such platforms.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While a range of chatbots for collaboration have been developed, there is relatively scarce research on the characteristics of collaboration with chatbots.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Chatbots for collaboration
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recent studies suggest that while chatbots may indeed serve as a low-threshold interface to information, services, and societal participation, they may also face challenges regarding bias and inclusion.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“recent work [58] has discovered substantial divergence in how these are written and interpreted, highlighting the complexity of designing guidelines for systems with complex social impact.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Democratizing chatbots–chatbots for all
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] McTear MF (2002) Spoken dialogue technology: enabling the conversational user interface. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 34(1):90–169 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Chatbots are a prominent AI-based technology, and as such in principle addressed by the broader concern for ethics and privacy in technology research in general and in AI-based technology in particular.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Proposed future research directions > Ethics and privacy in chatbots
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“chatbot research and design are still in its relative infancy”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Continuing the discussion and collaboration
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If the main characteristics of both are similar, transfer of the research results seems viable.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Ethical reflections and discussion on chatbots and chatbot applications are already emerging (e.g. [65, 91]).”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [65] Kretzschmar K, Tyroll H, Pavarini G, Manzini A, Singh I (2019) Can your phone be your therapist? Young people’s ethical perspectives on the use of fully automated conversational agents (chatbots) in mental health support. Biomed Inform Insights. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178222619829083 source
- Not checked yetcites [91] Ruane E, Birhane A, Ventresque A (2019) Conversational AI: social and ethical considerations. In: Proceedings for the 27th AIAI Irish conference on artificial intelligence and cognitive science—AICS 2019, pp 104–115. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol-2563. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2563/
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“personal benefits are often not measured in monetary terms, but the main focus of personal usage is the improvement of daily life or wellbeing”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We anticipate that advances in the democratization of chatbots will increasingly inspire ethical discourse that ties in with higher-level discussions about chatbot applications.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In business contexts such as corporate customer support scenarios, the potential impacts may be less severe, but specific corporate regulations and norms need to be considered.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the current lack of coherence in the emerging field of chatbot research, which may in part be observed by the broad range of journals and conferences in which findings from chatbot research are presented, and also the lack of commonly agreed key constructs, models, and measurement instruments”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Continuing the discussion and collaboration
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“many research results from existing pilot studies and prototypes for specific application areas exist and may be reused as the basis for transfer and generalization”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“chatbots are not conventional technologies, but they are developing as agents operating in social contexts”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the use of chatbots for social relationship, is often mainly driven by motivations for engagement and meaning-making”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The findings are based on discussions at the CONVERSATIONS workshop and mainly involve researchers from European organizations.”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Continuing the discussion and collaboration
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“future research will benefit from a greater degree of coherence and cohesiveness in the field”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Continuing the discussion and collaboration
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“results concerning chatbot communication, user experience, design, and technology are the basis for applying chatbots in specific application areas”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“many research studies exist in specific domains that could possibly be transferred to others”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“requirements in the health sector concerning privacy aspects, ethics, and trust may be significantly more demanding than similar requirements in other sectors”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Perspectives on chatbot application areas
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“without requiring chatbot developers to have in-depth software engineering knowledge—as exemplified in using visual programming approaches such as Blockly to chatbot development [89]”
§ Future directions for chatbot research: an interdisciplinary research agenda > Discussion > Implementing the future directions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Rodríguez-Gil L, García-Zubia J, Orduña P, Villar-Martinez A, López-De-Ipiña D (2019) New approach for conversational agent definition by non-programmers: a visual domain-specific language. IEEE Access 7:5262–5276 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The substantial impact of chatbots on the level of organizations and society is assumed to be seen in the future more so than the present.
“This may in part be due to the substantial impact on the level of organizations and society is assumed to be seen in the future more so than the present.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Chatbots will become more pervasive in the coming years and communication with non-human agents will increasingly become part of daily routines.
“As chatbots become more pervasive in the coming years, and communication with non-human agents increasingly become part of our daily routines, it becomes even more pressing to expand our knowledge on the antecedents, contents and consequences of human–machine communication.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Including common measurements across studies enables cross-study comparison and aggregation and tracking progress over time.
“there is clearly a benefit in including common measurements across studies so as to enable cross-study comparison and aggregation, and to be able to track progress over time.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The proposed research directions hold broad international relevance and interest.
“we assume the proposed directions hold broad international relevance and interest”
The paper relies on this without support.
Chatbots permit users to interact through natural language.
“Chatbots permit users to interact through natural language”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“However, some customer service chatbots show biased responses to users who speak certain language dialects [297-299].”
From AI Fairness in Data Management and Analytics: A Review on Challenges, Methodologies and Applications (2023) · cites this paper as [298]
In the citing paper
“These technologies present significant advantages to the student teaching and learning experience and are perceived as non-judgmental entities that can help reduce the fear of failure and foster an environment conducive to exploration and learning (Følstad et al., 2021;Kim et al., 2020).”
From The rapid rise of generative AI and its implications for academic integrity: Students’ perceptions and use of chatbots for assistance with assessments (2024) · cites this paper as Følstad et al., 2021
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Citation for AI ethics guidelines points to a dialogue-technology paper
MinorThe text attributes a finding about divergence in AI ethics guidelines to reference 58, but reference 58 is a 2002 paper on spoken dialogue technology.
“recent work [58] has discovered substantial divergence in how these are written and interpreted”
“58. McTear MF Spoken dialogue technology: enabling the conversational user interface ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 2002 34 1 90 169”
Collaboration scope excludes and includes dyadic interactions
MinorThe state-of-the-art section defines chatbots for collaboration as involving networks larger than dyads, but then lists one human collaborating with one chatbot as a type of collaboration.
“Chatbots for collaboration concerns chatbots involved in interactions with humans and possibly with other chatbots in networks larger than dyads.”
“Types of collaboration with chatbots may include (a) one human collaborating with one chatbot as an extension of human abilities”
Citations
Cites
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.14165 · Cited by 23,372
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
Latour, B. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001 · Cited by 16,778
Transformers: State-of-the-Art Natural Language Processing
Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., Funtowicz, M., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.6 · Cited by 8,741
The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?
Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019 · Cited by 8,727
Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor‐network‐theory
Turnbull, J. (2008) · New Zealand Geographer · doi:10.1111/j.1745-7939.2008.00151_4.x · Cited by 7,646
On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? 🦜
Bender, E. M., Gebru, T., McMillan-Major, A., & Shmitchell, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3442188.3445922 · Cited by 6,988
Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP
Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1355 · Cited by 3,684 · cited 1×
“It is important to note, however, that criticism around large models has been growing lately [9], especially ethical concerns regarding undesirable and often inscrutable societal biases percolating the models [9, 120], carbon footprint [9, 99], misuse and misinterpretation [9], privatization of AI research [99], and e…”
BackgroundHuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processing
Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., Funtowicz, M., et al. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.03771 · Cited by 3,347 · cited 1×
“Finally, the introduction of the Transformer [107] as a dominant and highly effective architecture for natural language processing along with high-quality open-source libraries [113] have lowered the barrier to entry and make it possible to build conversational models that exhibit high generalization and coherence [90…”
Fitzpatrick, K. K., Darcy, A., & Vierhile, M. (2017) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/mental.7785 · Cited by 2,730
GPT-3: Its Nature, Scope, Limits, and Consequences
Floridi, L., & Chiriatti, M. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09548-1 · Cited by 2,519 · cited 2×
“In this regard, large-scale generative models are becoming increasingly impactful, enabling a wide range of tasks that can benefit chatbot development [36].”
BackgroundGuidelines for Human-AI Interaction
Amershi, S., Weld, D., Vorvoreanu, M., Fourney, A., Nushi, B., Collisson, P., Suh, J., Iqbal, S., Bennett, P. N., Inkpen, K., et al. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300233 · Cited by 2,439 · cited 1×
“In terms of design, it is promising to see that general guidelines for human-AI interaction are emerging [3] and more of these are needed.”
BackgroundThe Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2020) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8 · Cited by 1,911
The Ethics of AI Ethics -- An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.03425 · Cited by 1,907
Vinyals, O., & Le, Q. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.05869 · Cited by 1,400
Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships
Bickmore, T. W., & Picard, R. W. (2005) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/1067860.1067867 · Cited by 1,333
Artificial intelligence and communication: A Human–Machine Communication research agenda
Guzman, A. L., & Lewis, S. C. (2019) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444819858691 · Cited by 1,238
AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance
Adam, M., Wessel, M., & Benlian, A. (2021) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-020-00414-7 · Cited by 1,195
Luger, E., & Sellen, A. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858288 · Cited by 1,176
Self-citationAraujo, T. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.03.051 · Cited by 1,156
Self-citationGo, E., & Sundar, S. S. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.020 · Cited by 1,089
Chatbots and Conversational Agents in Mental Health: A Review of the Psychiatric Landscape
Vaidyam, A. N., Wisniewski, H., Halamka, J. D., Kashavan, M. S., & Torous, J. B. (2019) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/0706743719828977 · Cited by 1,048
Bias in data‐driven artificial intelligence systems—An introductory survey
Ntoutsi, E., Fafalios, P., Gadiraju, U., Iosifidis, V., Nejdl, W., Vidal, M., Ruggieri, S., Turini, F., Papadopoulos, S., Krasanakis, E., et al. (2020) · WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery · doi:10.1002/widm.1356 · Cited by 1,043 · cited 1×
“[47]—such as the Ethical Guidelines for TrustworthyAI by the European Commission expert group on AI, and Microsoft’s FATE: Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics inAI—addressing issues includingmitigating bias and discrimination inAI systems and fairness in the use of AI systems [81].”
BackgroundSelf-citationBreazeal, C. (2003) · Robotics and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1016/s0921-8890(02)00373-1 · Cited by 1,037
A Systematic Review of Social Presence: Definition, Antecedents, and Implications
Oh, C. S., Bailenson, J. N., & Welch, G. F. (2018) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2018.00114 · Cited by 1,032
Rise of Machine Agency: A Framework for Studying the Psychology of Human–AI Interaction (HAII)
Sundar, S. S. (2020) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1093/jcmc/zmz026 · Cited by 871
Brandtzaeg, P. B., & Følstad, A. (2017) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_30 · Cited by 788
Self-citationRecipes for Building an Open-Domain Chatbot
Roller, S., Dinan, E., Goyal, N., Ju, D., Williamson, M., Liu, Y., Xu, J., Ott, M., Smith, E. M., Boureau, Y.-L., et al. (2021) · Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Main Volume · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.24 · Cited by 784 · cited 2×
“Finally, the introduction of the Transformer [107] as a dominant and highly effective architecture for natural language processing along with high-quality open-source libraries [113] have lowered the barrier to entry and make it possible to build conversational models that exhibit high generalization and coherence [90…”
BackgroundAI can be sexist and racist — it’s time to make it fair
Zou, J., & Schiebinger, L. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05707-8 · Cited by 765
From Eliza to XiaoIce: Challenges and opportunities with social chatbots
Shum, H.-Y., He, X.-D., & Li, D. (2018) · Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering · doi:10.1631/fitee.1700826 · Cited by 749
Voice Interfaces in Everyday Life
Porcheron, M., Fischer, J. E., Reeves, S., & Sharples, S. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174214 · Cited by 717 · cited 2×
“In consequence, knowledge on chatbot use has been gathered for a range of contexts—in the private sphere [87], at work [74], and in public spaces [17].”
BackgroundMachine, platform, crowd: Harnessing our digital future
Peregrina, Á. F. A. (2018) · Economía industrial · Cited by 681
In the shades of the uncanny valley: An experimental study of human–chatbot interaction
Ciechanowski, L., Przegalińska, A., Magnuski, M., & Gloor, P. A. (2018) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2018.01.055 · Cited by 680
Ho, A., Hancock, J., & Miner, A. S. (2018) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1093/joc/jqy026 · Cited by 629
A New Chatbot for Customer Service on Social Media
Xu, A., Liu, Z., Guo, Y., Sinha, V. S., & Akkiraju, R. (2017) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3025453.3025496 · Cited by 627 · cited 1×
“For example, there is often no clear distinction between social chatter and goal-orientation in conversational agents—as seen by the importance of social responses for customer service chatbots [114].”
BackgroundRe-examining Whether, Why, and How Human-AI Interaction Is Uniquely Difficult to Design
Yang, Q., Steinfeld, A., Rosé, C., & Zimmerman, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376301 · Cited by 622 · cited 2×
“issues may in part be seen as due to the more general challenge of designing humanAI interaction [116].”
BackgroundTowards a Human-like Open-Domain Chatbot
Adiwardana, D., Luong, M.-T., So, D. R., Hall, J., Fiedel, N., Thoppilan, R., Yang, Z., Kulshreshtha, A., Nemade, G., Lu, Y., et al. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.09977 · Cited by 614
A Taxonomy of Social Cues for Conversational Agents
Feine, J., Gnewuch, U., Morana, S., & Maedche, A. (2019) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.07.009 · Cited by 586
A Survey on Dialogue Systems: Recent Advances and New Frontiers
Chen, H., Liu, X., Yin, D., & Tang, J. (2017) · ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter · doi:10.1145/3166054.3166058 · Cited by 579
Spoken dialogue technology: enabling the conversational user interface
McTear, M. F. (2002) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/505282.505285 · Cited by 571
Embodiment in conversational interfaces
Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Billinghurst, M., Campbell, L. W., Chang, K., Vilhjálmsson, H. H., & Yan, H. (1999) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/302979.303150 · Cited by 569
McTear, M. (2002) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-0-85729-414-2 · Cited by 569
User Experiences of Social Support From Companion Chatbots in Everyday Contexts: Thematic Analysis
Ta, V., Griffith, C., Boatfield, C., Wang, X., Civitello, M., Bader, H., DeCero, E., & Loggarakis, A. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/16235 · Cited by 561
Dale, R. (2016) · Natural Language Engineering · doi:10.1017/s1351324916000243 · Cited by 554
(2014) · doi:10.5555/2615731.2617415 · Cited by 553
Schuller, B. W. (2018) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3129340 · Cited by 547
Chatbots and the new world of HCI
Følstad, A., & Brandtzæg, P. B. (2017) · interactions · doi:10.1145/3085558 · Cited by 520
Self-citationRediscovering the use of chatbots in education: A systematic literature review
Pérez, J. Q., Daradoumis, T., & Puig, J. M. M. (2020) · Computer Applications in Engineering Education · doi:10.1002/cae.22326 · Cited by 483
A Conversational Agent as Museum Guide – Design and Evaluation of a Real-World Application
Kopp, S., Gesellensetter, L., Krämer, N. C., & Wachsmuth, I. (2005) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/11550617_28 · Cited by 400
The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines
Hagendorff, T. (2020) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 394
Lee, S., & Choi, J. (2017) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.02.005 · Cited by 388
Evaluating and Informing the Design of Chatbots
Jain, M., Kumar, P., Kota, R., & Patel, S. N. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3196709.3196735 · Cited by 376 · cited 1×
“There is also a growing base of research to inform design of chatbot interactions, whether this concerns conversational design [6], personalization of chatbots [69], the use of interactive elements in chatbots [57], or the use of social cues to indicate social status and capabilities [32].”
BackgroundSurvey on evaluation methods for dialogue systems
Deriu, J., Rodrigo, A., Otegi, A., Echegoyen, G., Rosset, S., Agirre, E., & Cieliebak, M. (2020) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-020-09866-x · Cited by 361
GUS, a frame-driven dialog system
Bobrow, D. G., Kaplan, R. M., Kay, M., Norman, D. A., Thompson, H. S., & Winograd, T. A. (1977) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(77)90018-2 · Cited by 329
Users' experiences with chatbots: findings from a questionnaire study
Følstad, A., & Brandtzæg, P. B. (2020) · Quality and User Experience · doi:10.1007/s41233-020-00033-2 · Cited by 324 · cited 2×
“In line with this scoping of the research area, we understand chatbots as conversational agents providing access to information and services through interaction in everyday language —an understanding which is in line with the definitions by Føl-stad and Brandtzaeg [39] and Hobert and Meyer von Wolff [54].”
BackgroundSelf-citationMachine, Platform, Crowd: Harnessing Our Digital Future
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. P. (2017) · Cited by 313
Chatbots, Humbots, and the Quest for Artificial General Intelligence
Grudin, J., & Jacques, R. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300439 · Cited by 275 · cited 4×
“We hold that such collaboration will benefit from being implemented while reflecting on human collaboration, and in line with relevant empirical evidence of chatbot research—in linewith reflections byGrudin and Jacques [45].”
BackgroundResultInfluentialKretzschmar, K., Tyroll, H., Pavarini, G., Manzini, A., Singh, I., & NeurOx Young People’s Advisory Group (2019) · Biomedical Informatics Insights · doi:10.1177/1178222619829083 · Cited by 270
Unpacking the Social Media Bot: A Typology to Guide Research and Policy
Gorwa, R., & Guilbeault, D. (2020) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/poi3.184 · Cited by 270
A Framework for Reasoning About the Human in the Loop
Cranor, L. F. (2018) · Figshare · doi:10.1184/r1/6620651 · Cited by 256
An Initial Model of Trust in Chatbots for Customer Service—Findings from a Questionnaire Study
Nordheim, C. B., Følstad, A., & Bjørkli, C. A. (2019) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1093/iwc/iwz022 · Cited by 233
Self-citationChung, H., Iorga, M., Voas, J., & Lee, S. (2017) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2017.3571053 · Cited by 230
Predicting consumer responses to a chatbot on facebook
Zarouali, B., Van den Broeck, E., Walrave, M., & Poels, K. (2018) · Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking · doi:10.1089/cyber.2017.0518 · Cited by 229
A Framework for Understanding Unintended Consequences of Machine Learning
Suresh, H., & Guttag, J. V. (2019) · Cited by 229
Resilient Chatbots: Repair Strategy Preferences for Conversational Breakdowns
Ashktorab, Z., Jain, M., Liao, Q. V., & Weisz, J. D. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300484 · Cited by 224
What types of COVID-19 conspiracies are populated by Twitter bots?
Ferrara, E. (2020) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v25i6.10633 · Cited by 223
Comparing Data from Chatbot and Web Surveys
Kim, S., Lee, J., & Gweon, G. (2019) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300316 · Cited by 218
Collaboration in Human-Robot Teams
Hoffman, G., & Breazeal, C. (2004) · AIAA 1st Intelligent Systems Technical Conference · doi:10.2514/6.2004-6434 · Cited by 208
Generation and Evaluation of Communicative Robot Gesture
Salem, M., Kopp, S., Wachsmuth, I., Rohlfing, K. J., & Joublin, F. (2012) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-011-0124-9 · Cited by 182
Farooq, U., & Grudin, J. T. (2016) · interactions · doi:10.1145/3001896 · Cited by 178
Xatkit: A Multimodal Low-Code Chatbot Development Framework
Daniel, G., Cabot, J., Deruelle, L., & Derras, M. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2966919 · Cited by 173
The Practical Handbook of Internet Computing
Singh, M. P. (2004) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203507223 · Cited by 172 · cited 1×
“Conversational computer systems have also had a long and, at times, winding path through various commercial applications—particularly automated solutions for customer service, sales and support [72], including interactive voice response (IVR) systems for phone-based self service [23].”
BackgroundInteractive voice response: Review of studies 1989–2000
Corkrey, R., & Parkinson, L. (2002) · Behavoir research methods, instruments & computers · doi:10.3758/bf03195462 · Cited by 171
I'm Sorry, Dave, I'm Afraid I Can't Do That: Chatbot Perception and Expectations
Zamora, J. (2017) · Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction · doi:10.1145/3125739.3125766 · Cited by 164
Conversational AI: Dialogue Systems, Conversational Agents, and Chatbots
McTear, M. (2021) · Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-02176-3 · Cited by 155 · cited 4×
“As noted byMcTear [77], research streams such as those of dialogue systems, embodied conversational agents, and social robotics, are now converging in a common aim”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSynthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies
Hirst, G., & Lectures, S. (2009) · Cited by 150
Goel, A. K., & Polepeddi, L. (2018) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781351186193-7 · Cited by 146
Conversational agents in business: A systematic literature review and future research directions
Bavaresco, R., Silveira, D., Reis, E., Barbosa, J., Righi, R., Costa, C., Antunes, R., Gomes, M., Gatti, C., Vanzin, M., et al. (2020) · Computer Science Review · doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100239 · Cited by 143 · cited 1×
“A substantial body of research of relevance for chatbot use has been developed within broad domains such as health [105], education [84], and business [8], as well as more specific application domains such as polling [62], information search [73], libraries [92], andmuseums [64].”
BackgroundContextual understanding by computers
Weizenbaum, J. (1967) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/363534.363545 · Cited by 137
Perski, O., Crane, D., Beard, E., & Brown, J. (2019) · DIGITAL HEALTH · doi:10.1177/2055207619880676 · Cited by 135
Understanding Chatbot-mediated Task Management
Toxtli, C., Monroy-Hernández, A., & Cranshaw, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173632 · Cited by 127 · cited 2×
“and implemented in a range of contexts and for various purposes, for example, to support group processes in education [43], at work [11] and organizational settings [104], as well as in gaming communities [96].”
BackgroundChatbots as Conversational Healthcare Services
Jovanovic, M., Báez, M., & Casati, F. (2020) · IEEE Internet Computing · doi:10.1109/mic.2020.3037151 · Cited by 123
Self-citationConversational UX Design: A Practitioner's Guide to the Natural Conversation Framework
Research-Almaden, I., Moore, R. J., Arar, R., & Research-Almaden, I. (2019) · doi:10.1145/3304087 · Cited by 118
Liao, Q. V., Mas-ud Hussain, M., Chandar, P., Davis, M., Khazaeni, Y., Crasso, M. P., Wang, D., Muller, M., Shami, N. S., & Geyer, W. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173577 · Cited by 116
Artificially intelligent conversational agents in libraries
Rubin, V. L., Chen, Y., & Thorimbert, L. M. (2010) · Library Hi Tech · doi:10.1108/07378831011096196 · Cited by 113
Feine, J., Gnewuch, U., Morana, S., & Maedche, A. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_6 · Cited by 99
Tell me more! assessing interactions with social robots from speech
Laban, G., George, J.-N., Morrison, V., & Cross, E. S. (2020) · Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics · doi:10.1515/pjbr-2021-0011 · Cited by 81
Self-citationApproaches for Dialog Management in Conversational Agents
Harms, J.-G., Kucherbaev, P., Bozzon, A., & Houben, G.-J. (2019) · IEEE Internet Computing · doi:10.1109/mic.2018.2881519 · Cited by 78
Understanding and Measuring User Experience in Conversational Interfaces
Kocaballi, A. B., Laranjo, L., & Coiera, E. (2019) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1093/iwc/iwz015 · Cited by 68
Bott, N., Wexler, S., Drury, L., Pollak, C., Wang, V., Scher, K., & Narducci, S. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/13440 · Cited by 61
Syvänen, S., & Valentini, C. (2020) · Journal of Communication Management · doi:10.1108/jcom-11-2019-0145 · Cited by 56 · cited 1×
“Nevertheless, as noted in a review of the chatbot literature, there has been an initial lack of ethical discussion in chatbot research [102]—though noteworthy exceptions to this exist, such as the exploration of ethical and social considerations for conversational AI by Ruane et al.”
Backgroundvan der Goot, M. J., & Pilgrim, T. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_12 · Cited by 54
Improving Conversations: Lessons Learnt from Manual Analysis of Chatbot Dialogues
Kvale, K., Sell, O. A., Hodnebrog, S., & Følstad, A. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_13 · Cited by 51
Self-citationIt Takes a Village: Integrating an Adaptive Chatbot into an Online Gaming Community
Seering, J., Luria, M., Ye, C., Kaufman, G. F., & Hammer, J. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376708 · Cited by 51
Conversational Agent Research Toolkit
Araujo, T. (2020) · Computational Communication Research · doi:10.5117/ccr2020.1.002.arau · Cited by 42
Self-citationvon Wolff, R. M., Hobert, S., Masuch, K., & Schümann, M. (2020) · Pacific Asia journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1pais.12203 · Cited by 40 · cited 2×
“Chatbots are currently taken up in application areas as diverse as customer service [1], health [105], education [53], and office work [78].”
BackgroundSelf-citationBittner, E., & Shoury, O. (2019) · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.24251/hicss.2019.029 · Cited by 37
Conversational Interfaces for Information Search
Liao, Q. V., Geyer, W., Muller, M. J., & Khazaen, Y. (2020) · Human-computer interaction series · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38825-6_13 · Cited by 37
(2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7 · Cited by 37
The Effect of Personalization Techniques in Users' Perceptions of Conversational Recommender Systems
Laban, G., & Araujo, T. (2020) · Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents · doi:10.1145/3383652.3423890 · Cited by 36
Self-citationThe Effect of Audiences on the User Experience with Conversational Interfaces in Physical Spaces
Candello, H., Pinhanez, C., Pichiliani, M., Cavalin, P., Figueiredo, F., Vasconcelos, M., & Do Carmo, H. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300320 · Cited by 33 · cited 1×
“In consequence, knowledge on chatbot use has been gathered for a range of contexts—in the private sphere [87], at work [74], and in public spaces [17].”
BackgroundBaez, M., Daniel, F., & Casati, F. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_7 · Cited by 31
Generating chat bots from web API specifications
Vaziri, M., Mandel, L., Shinnar, A., Simèon, J., & Hirzel, M. J. (2017) · ACM SIGPLAN International Symposium on New Ideas, New Paradigms, and Reflections on Programming and Software (Onward!) · doi:10.1145/3133850.3133864 · Cited by 29
Chasing the Chatbots: Directions for Interaction and Design Research
Piccolo, L. S. G., Mensio, M., & Alani, H. (2019) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-17705-8_14 · Cited by 28 · cited 3×
“[20, 86]), or user behaviour and experience (e.”
BackgroundLaban, G., & Araujo, T. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_15 · Cited by 27
Self-citationHobert, S., & Berens, F. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_18 · Cited by 24 · cited 3×
“Chatbots are currently taken up in application areas as diverse as customer service [1], health [105], education [53], and office work [78].”
BackgroundSelf-citationCivicBots – Chatbots for Supporting Youth in Societal Participation
Väänänen, K., Hiltunen, A., Varsaluoma, J., & Pietilä, I. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39540-7_10 · Cited by 22
Rodriguez-Gil, L., Garcia-Zubia, J., Orduna, P., Villar-Martinez, A., & Lopez-De-Ipina, D. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2883500 · Cited by 20
Emoty: an Emotionally Sensitive Conversational Agent for People with Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Catania, F., Di Nardo, N., Garzotto, F., & Occhiuto, D. (2019) · Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences · doi:10.24251/hicss.2019.244 · Cited by 17 · cited 2×
“Chatbots have been suggested as accessible interactive systems for visually impaired in need of an easily navigable user interface [7], as conversational support for users with special needs [19], and to support youth to engage in societal issues [110].”
BackgroundSelf-citationUniversity of St.Gallen, I. O. I. M., Zierau, N., Engel, C., Söllner, M., University of Kassel, I. S. A. S. E., Leimeister, J. M., & University of Kassel, I. S. (2020) · WI2020 Zentrale Tracks · doi:10.30844/wi_2020_a7-zierau · Cited by 17 · cited 1×
“This has helped identify factors contributing to positive or negative user experience [118] and has addressed specific aspects such as trust [119], perceived social support [71], human likeness [4], and how these aspects are impacted by chatbot design [42].”
BackgroundSieber, A. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-658-24393-7_5 · Cited by 17
Human-Robot Cooperation in Prisoner Dilemma Games
Hsieh, T.-Y., Chaudhury, B., & Cross, E. S. (2020) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1145/3371382.3378309 · Cited by 15
Human-in-the-Loop Conversation Agent for Customer Service
Paikens, P., Znotiņš, A., & Bārzdiņš, G. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51310-8_25 · Cited by 11
Zierau, N., Engel, C., Söllner, M., & Leimeister, J. M. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3920577 · Cited by 9
REST2Bot: Bridging the Gap between Bot Platforms and REST APIs
Yaghoub-Zadeh-Fard, M.-A., Zamanirad, S., Benatallah, B., & Casati, F. (2020) · International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) · doi:10.1145/3366424.3383551 · Cited by 6
(2019) · AICS
Flagged first, then by citations
6 of the 124 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Følstad A, Brandtzaeg PB, Feltwell T, Law ELC, Tscheligi M, Luger E (2018) Chatbots for social good. In: Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (paper no. SIG06). ACM, New York
- Hobert S, Meyer von Wolff, R (2019) Say hello to your new automated tutor—a structured literature review on pedagogical conversational agents. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik. Association for Information Systems, pp.301–313
- Shevat A (2017) Designing bots: creating conversational experiences. O’Reilly Media, Boston
Cited by
Sorted by citations
My AI Friend: How Users of a Social Chatbot Understand Their Human–AI Friendship
Brandtzaeg, P. B., Skjuve, M., & Følstad, A. (2022) · Human Communication Research · doi:10.1093/hcr/hqac008 · Cited by 490
Self-citationGruenhagen, J. H., Sinclair, P. M., Carroll, J.-A., Baker, P. R. A., Wilson, A., & Demant, D. (2024) · Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100273 · Cited by 339
Roles, Users, Benefits, and Limitations of Chatbots in Health Care: Rapid Review (Preprint)
Laymouna, M., Ma, Y., Lessard, D., Schuster, T., Engler, K., & Lebouché, B. (2024) · doi:10.2196/preprints.56930 · Cited by 302
Roles, Users, Benefits, and Limitations of Chatbots in Health Care: Rapid Review
Laymouna, M., Ma, Y., Lessard, D., Schuster, T., Engler, K., & Lebouché, B. (2024) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/56930 · Cited by 305
“The absence of specific laws and regulations addressing health care chatbot use introduces risks around liability and medicolegal issues [72,286,287].”
Nicolescu, L., & Tudorache, M. T. (2022) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics11101579 · Cited by 280
Metadata
- Authors
- Følstad, A., Araujo, T., Law, E. L.-C., Brandtzaeg, P. B., Papadopoulos, S., Reis, L., Baez, M., Laban, G., McAllister, P., Ischen, C., Wald, R., Catania, F., Meyer von Wolff, R., Hobert, S., & Luger, E.
- Affiliations
- SINTEF (NO)
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- Durham University (GB)
- Centre for Research and Technology Hellas (GR)
- University of Bamberg (DE)
- University of Glasgow (GB)
- University of Ulster (GB)
- Politecnico di Milano (IT)
- University of Göttingen (DE)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Følstad, Asbjørn
- ORCID
- Venue
- Computing
- Published
- 2021-10-19
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2915-2942
- ISSN
- 0010-485X (ISSN-L)
- 1436-5057
- PMC
- PMC8523728
- OpenAlex
- W3205211246
- Semantic Scholar
- d6332ee6d93fd27e74b4bd424c5000b7d643b73f
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 124
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 58 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 22
- FWCI
- 12.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Computing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (acceptedVersion)
- Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Norges Forskningsråd (270940)
- SINTEF AS
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Keywords
- chatbots, research agenda, user experience, chatbot design, collaboration, ethics, privacy, social impact
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review