Cited by 61Social Robot Interaction and HRIGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologySpeech and dialogue systems

Gaze and Attention Management for Embodied Conversational Agents

Pejsa, Tomislav, Andrist, Sean, Gleicher, Michael, Mutlu, Bilge·2015·ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems

Abstract

To facilitate natural interactions between humans and embodied conversational agents (ECAs), we need to endow the latter with the same nonverbal cues that humans use to communicate. Gaze cues in particular are integral in mechanisms for communication and management of attention in social interactions, which can trigger important social and cognitive processes, such as establishment of affiliation between people or learning new information. The fundamental building blocks of gaze behaviors are gaze shifts : coordinated movements of the eyes, head, and body toward objects and information in the environment. In this article, we present a novel computational model for gaze shift synthesis for ECAs that supports parametric control over coordinated eye, head, and upper body movements. We employed the model in three studies with human participants. In the first study, we validated the model by showing that participants are able to interpret the agent’s gaze direction accurately. In the second and third studies, we showed that by adjusting the participation of the head and upper body in gaze shifts, we can control the strength of the attention signals conveyed, thereby strengthening or weakening their social and cognitive effects. The second study shows that manipulation of eye--head coordination in gaze enables an agent to convey more information or establish stronger affiliation with participants in a teaching task, while the third study demonstrates how manipulation of upper body…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2724731

Cites

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pejsa, T., Andrist, S., Gleicher, M., & Mutlu, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Computer Sciences, W. Dayton St., Madison, WI
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems
Published
2015-03-25
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
1-34
ISSN
  • 2160-6455 (ISSN-L)
  • 2160-6463
OpenAlex
W2012804445
Cited by
61
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
8.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1017952)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
embodied conversational agents, gaze shifts, gaze cues, nonverbal communication, attention management, eye-head coordination, gaze direction perception, affiliation, teaching, social 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