Cited by 66Social Robot Interaction and HRIInnovative Human-Technology InteractionAI in Service Interactions

Social Boundaries for Personal Agents in the Interpersonal Space of the Home

Open access
Luria, Michal, Zheng, Rebecca, Huffman, Bennett, Huang, Shuangni, Zimmerman, John, Forlizzi, Jodi·2020·Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

The presence of voice activated personal assistants (VAPAs) in people's homes rises each year [31]. Industry efforts are invested in making interactions with VAPAs more personal by leveraging information from messages and calendars, and by accessing user accounts for 3rd party services. However, the use of personal data becomes more complicated in interpersonal spaces, such as people's homes. Should a shared agent access the information of many users? If it does, how should it navigate issues of privacy and control? Designers currently lack guidelines to help them design appropriate agent behaviors. We used Speed Dating to explore inchoate social mores around agent actions within a home, including issues of proactivity, interpersonal conflict, and agent prevarication. Findings offer new insights on how more socially sophisticated agents might sense, make judgements about, and navigate social roles and individuals. We discuss how our findings might impact future research and future agent behaviors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3313831.3376311

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Most researchers have primarily studied group voice assistant use in home settings with children and parents.

    “Since most researchers have primarily studied group voice assistant use in home settings with children and parents [2,14,17,18], we encourage future work to explore VA group use in community living.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 45 · Cited by 66

Authors
Luria, M., Zheng, R., Huffman, B., Huang, S., Zimmerman, J., & Forlizzi, J.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2020-04-21
Pages
1-12
OpenAlex
W3030049029
Cited by
66
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3
FWCI
13.75
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
Funders
National Science Foundation (SES1734456)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
social boundaries, privacy, personal data sharing, interpersonal conflict, social mores, social roles

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