Can computer personalities be human personalities?
Open accessAbstract
The present study demonstrates that (1) computer personalities can be easily created using a minimal set of cues, and (2) that people will respond to these personalities in the same way they would respond to similar human personalities.The present study focuses on the "simikirityattraction hypothesis," which predicts that people will prefer to interact with others who are similar in personality.In an experiment (N = 48), dominant and submissive subjects were randomly matched with either a dominant or submissive computer.When a computer was endowed with the properties associated with dominance or submissiveness, subjects recognized the computer's personality type along only that dimension.In addition, subjects not only preferred the similar computer, but they were more satisfied with the interaction.The findings demonstrate that personality does not require richly defined agents, sophisticated pictorial representations, natural language processing, or artificial intelligence.Rather, even the most superficial manipulations are sufficient to produce personality, with powerful effects.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 human-computer interaction contexts, when presented with a technology possessing cues normally associated with human behavior, individuals respond by exhibiting social behavior and making anthropomorphic attributions.
“In HCI contexts, when presented with a technology possessing cues that are normally associated with human behavior (e.g., language, turn-taking, interactivity), individuals respond by exhibiting social behavior and making anthropomorphic attributions (Epley et al. 2007; Moon and Nass 1996; Nass et al. 1995).”
From AI-based chatbots in customer service and their effects on user compliance (2021) · cites this paper as Nass et al. 1995
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. R. (1994) · Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '94 · doi:10.1145/259963.260288 · Cited by 579 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Bern, S.L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgeny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
- Byrne, D., Griffitt, W., & Stefaniak, D. (1967). Attraction and similarity of personality characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5,82-90.
- Kiesler, D.J. (1983). The 1982 interpersonal circle A taxonomy for complementarily in human transactions. Psychological Review, 90, 185-214.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
On-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model
Corritore, C. L., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00041-7 · Cited by 1,200 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
“For instance, CASA studies have shown that politeness norms (Nass et al. 1999), gender and ethnicity stereotypes (Nass and Moon 2000; Nass et al. 1997), personality response (Nass et al. 1995), and flattery effects (Fogg and Nass 1997) are also present in HCI.”
Background"Alexa is my new BFF": Social Roles, User Satisfaction, and Personification of the Amazon Echo
Purington, A., Taft, J. G., Sannon, S., Bazarova, N. N., & Taylor, S. H. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3027063.3053246 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
At Your Service: Designing Voice Assistant Personalities to Improve Automotive User Interfaces
Braun, M., Mainz, A., Chadowitz, R., Pfleging, B., & Alt, F. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300270 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
First Impressions in Human--Agent Virtual Encounters
Cafaro, A., Vilhjálmsson, H. H., & Bickmore, T. (2016) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/2940325 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Kim, T., & Song, H. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2021.101595 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
User Perception of Text-Based Chatbot Personality
Ruane, E., Farrell, S., & Ventresque, A. (2021) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-68288-0_3 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Examining Agency, Expertise, and Roles of AI Systems in AI-Mediated Communication
Mieczkowski, H., & Hancock, J. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/asnv4 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
- Authors
- Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B., & Dryer, C.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- ORCID
- Reeves, Byron
- Venue
- Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '95
- Publisher
- ACM Press
- Published
- 1995
- Pages
- 228-229
- OpenAlex
- W1994660327
- Cited by
- 251
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 9.39
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
- Keywords
- personality, artificial intelligence, human-computer 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
