CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 21Social Robot Interaction and HRIAI in Service InteractionsSpeech and dialogue systems

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward an Objective Linguistic-Based Measure of Perceived Embodied Conversational Agent Power and Likeability

Pickard, Matthew D., Burgoon, Judee K., Derrick, Douglas C.·2014·International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1080/10447318.2014.888504
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Embodied conversational agents (ECA) are a type of intelligent, multimodal computer interface that allow computers to interact with humans in a face-to-face manner. It is quite feasible that ECAs will someday replace the common keyboard as a human–computer interface. However, we have much to understand about how people interact with such embodied virtual agents. In this study, we performed a laboratory experiment, in an airport screening context, to assess how people’s linguistic behavior changes with their perceptions of the ECA’s power and likeability. The results show that people tend to manifest more verbal immediacy and expressivity, as well as offer more information about themselves, with ECAs they perceive as more likeable and less powerful.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10447318.2014.888504

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • When a CA uses first-person singular pronouns and signals an identity, it is positively associated with likeability.

    “previous research has demonstrated that when a CA used firstperson singular pronouns and thus signaled an identity, the CA was positively associated with likeability (Pickard et al. 2014).”

    From AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance (2021) · cites this paper as Pickard et al. 2014

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bernstein, I. S. (1980). Dominance: A theoretical perspective for ethologists. Dominance relations: An ethological view of human conflict and social interaction, 71–84. New York: Garland Press, Inc.
  2. Ma C., 2005, Proceedings of the AISB’05 Symposium on Conversational Informatics for Supporting Social Intelligence and Interaction—Situational and Environmental Information Enforcing Involvement in Conversation, 136
  3. Pennebaker J. W., 2007, Linguistic inquiry and word count

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Pickard, M. D., Burgoon, J. K., & Derrick, D. C.
Affiliations
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • University of Nebraska at Omaha (US)
Corresponding author
Pickard, Matthew D.
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2014-04-25
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
495-516
ISSN
  • 1044-7318 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7590
DOI
10.1080/10447318.2014.888504
OpenAlex
W2064491940
Cited by
21
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
embodied conversational agents, perceived power, likeability, language behavior, verbal immediacy, expressivity, self-disclosure, airport security screening, human-agent interaction

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.

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