Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Open accessAbstract
When creating conversational agents, designers have to make decisions about the way the agents present themselves. In this position paper, we identify and synthesize ethical dilemmas that conversational interface designers and researchers face around gender of conversational agents. First, we identify three layers that cause tension in designing conversational agents’ gender: (i) interactional qualities; (ii) goal-orientation; and (iii) societal issues. We then argue that conversational agent designers and re- searchers can navigate this problem space by comparing two ethical frameworks: a utilitarian perspective and a dialogical ethics perspective. Finally, we argue that dialogical ethics can be a balanced, ethical lens that can help conversational agent designers and researchers make design decisions about the gender of an agent
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Earlier studies indicate that audiences generally evaluate AI-created art on par with human-made art.
“This view contrasts with earlier studies indicating that audiences generally evaluate AI-created art on par with human-made art [62].”
Designers note that audiences might not always differentiate between AI-generated and human-made art.
“While designers often note, consistent with previous findings [62], that audiences might not always differentiate between AI-generated and human-made art, they remain apprehensive about public knowledge of such collaborations for fear of damaging their reputation.”
Designers remain apprehensive about public knowledge of their collaborations with AI for fear of damaging their reputation.
“While designers often note, consistent with previous findings [62], that audiences might not always differentiate between AI-generated and human-made art, they remain apprehensive about public knowledge of such collaborations for fear of damaging their reputation.”
Cites
Autonomic nervous system activity in emotion: a review
Kreibig, S. D. (2010) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.03.010 · Cited by 3,188 · see citing works
Boucsein, W. (2012) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-1126-0 · Cited by 2,526 · see citing works
Individual variations in structure and function of human eccrine sweat gland
Sato, K., & Sato, F. (1983) · American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.1983.245.2.r203 · Cited by 215 · see citing works
Emotion Elicitation: A Comparison of Pictures and Films
Uhrig, M. K., Trautmann, N., Baumgärtner, U., Treede, R.-D., Henrich, F., Hiller, W., & Marschall, S. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00180 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stavropoulos, V., Motti-Stefanidi, F., & Griffiths, M. D. (2022) · European Psychologist · doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000451 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Explainability pitfalls: beyond dark patterns in explainable AI
Ehsan, U., & Riedl, M. O. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100971 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Capable but Amoral? Comparing AI and Human Expert Collaboration in Ethical Decision Making
Tolmeijer, S., Christen, M., Kandul, S., Kneer, M., & Bernstein, A. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517732 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
He, Q., Zheng, W., Bao, H., Chen, R., & Tong, X. (2023) · Proceedings of the Eleventh International Symposium of Chinese CHI · doi:10.1145/3629606.3629675 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Khan, O., & Seo, J. (2026) · Proceedings of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791242 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jung, J., Murray-Rust, D., Gadiraju, U., Bozzon, A., Shamma, D. A., Drukcer, S., Barbosa, S., Lampe, C. A. C., Appert, C., Williamson, J., & Yatani, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Bath (GB)
- ORCID
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2020-04-25
- OpenAlex
- W3028739380
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 212 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
- Type
- paratext
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- resolver.tudelft.nl
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
- Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- virtual reality, psychophysiological measurement, affective states
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
