Cited by 5Speech and dialogue systemsIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Managing emotional dialogue for a virtual cancer patient: a schema-guided approach

Kane, Benjamin, Giugno, Catherine, Schubert, Lenhart, Haut, Kurtis, Wohn, Caleb, Hoque, Ehsan·2024·IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing

Abstract

In this paper, we describe a general-purpose dialogue management framework used to design SOPHIE (Standardized Online Patient for Healthcare Interaction Education). SOPHIE simulates a virtual standardized cancer patient that allows physicians to practice skills such as empathy and patient empowerment in end-of-life communication. To provide the user with an opportunity to practice these skills, SOPHIE must produce a natural, emotionally appropriate conversation, yet handle topic shifts and open-ended questions from the user. To accomplish this, our approach to dialogue management loosely followsschemas– explicit representations of thetypicalflows of dialogue in end-of-life communication – while also using flexible pattern-driven methods for interpretation and generation. We conduct a crowdsourced evaluation of conversations between medical students and SOPHIE. Our agent is judged to produce responses that are natural, emotionally appropriate, and consistent with her role as a cancer patient. Furthermore, it significantly outperforms an end-to-end neural model fine-tuned on a human standardized patient corpus, attesting to the advantages of a schema-guided approach in this domain. However, the system is currently limited in its ability to generate responses that are judged to demonstrate deep understanding of the user, suggesting that future work should place focus on integrating this framework with robust natural language understanding and commonsense reasoning methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/taffc.2023.3317805

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Digital clinical empathy requires intentional strategies (timely acknowledgment, authenticity, appropriate boundary setting, contextual responsiveness) and may be best sustained through hybrid models combining AI-enabled support with human oversight.

    “Studies measuring cancer-related live chat environments and simulation-based systems highlight that digital clinical empathy requires intentional strategies (ie, timely acknowledgment, authenticity, appropriate boundary setting, and contextual responsiveness) and may be best sustained through hybrid models that combine AI-enabled support with human oversight [34-36].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kane, B., Giugno, C., Schubert, L., Haut, K., Wohn, C., & Hoque, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester (US)
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing
Published
2024-07
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
1041-1052
ISSN
  • 1949-3045 (ISSN-L)
  • 2371-9850
OpenAlex
W4386902886
Cited by
5
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5
FWCI
0.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF19-1-0029)
  • National Science Foundation (IIS-1750380, 1748969)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
dialogue management, virtual patients, standardized patients, cancer, end-of-life communication, empathy, patient empowerment, emotional dialogue, medical education, chatbots, crowdsourced evaluation, medical students, topic shift, open-ended questions

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