Cited by 208Social Robot Interaction and HRIVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsAugmented Reality Applications

Does a Digital Assistant Need a Body? The Influence of Visual Embodiment and Social Behavior on the Perception of Intelligent Virtual Agents in AR

Kim, Kangsoo, Boelling, Luke, Haesler, Steffen, Bailenson, Jeremy, Bruder, Gerd, Welch, Greg F.·2018·2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR)

Abstract

Intelligent Virtual Agents (IVAs) are becoming part of our everyday life, thanks to artificial intelligence technology and Internet of Things devices. For example, users can control their connected home appliances through natural voice commands to the IVA. However, most current-state commercial IVAs, such as Amazon Alexa, mainly focus on voice commands and voice feedback, and lack the ability to provide non-verbal cues which are an important part of social interaction. Augmented Reality (AR) has the potential to overcome this challenge by providing a visual embodiment of the IVA. In this paper we investigate how visual embodiment and social behaviors influence the perception of the IVA. We hypothesize that a user's confidence in an IVA's ability to perform tasks is improved when imbuing the agent with a human body and social behaviors compared to the agent solely depending on voice feedback. In other words, an agent's embodied gesture and locomotion behavior exhibiting awareness of the surrounding real world or exerting influence over the environment can improve the perceived social presence with and confidence in the agent. We present a human-subject study, in which we evaluated the hypothesis and compared different forms of IVAs with speech, gesturing, and locomotion behaviors in an interactive AR scenario. The results show support for the hypothesis with measures of confidence, trust, and social presence. We discuss implications for future developments in the field of IVAs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/ismar.2018.00039

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • In the context of both autonomous vehicles and virtual agents, people showed more trust in AIs with human characteristics than without.

    “For example, in the context of both autonomous vehicles and virtual agents, people showed more trust in AIs with human characteristics than without [41-43].”

    From Anthropomorphism in AI: hype and fallacy (2024) · cites this paper as [42]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, K., Boelling, L., Haesler, S., Bailenson, J., Bruder, G., & Welch, G. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Central Florida (US)
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • Stanford University (US)
Venue
2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2018-10
Pages
105-114
ISSN
1554-7868 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2909822833
Cited by
206
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 4
FWCI
26.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings - International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
Keywords
intelligent virtual agents, augmented reality, social presence, user confidence, gesturing, locomotor activity, nonverbal cues, voice feedback, virtual assistants, 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