Cited by 100Speech and dialogue systemsAI in Service InteractionsSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Mapping Perceptions of Humanness in Intelligent Personal Assistant Interaction

Open access
Doyle, Philip R., Edwards, Justin, Dumbleton, Odile, Clark, Leigh, Cowan, Benjamin R.·2019·Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

Abstract

Humanness is core to speech interface design. Yet little is known about how users conceptualise perceptions of humanness and how people define their interaction with speech interfaces through this. To map these perceptions n=21 participants held dialogues with a human and two speech interface based intelligent personal assistants, and then reflected and compared their experiences using the repertory grid technique. Analysis of the constructs show that perceptions of humanness are multidimensional, focusing on eight key themes: partner knowledge set, interpersonal connection, linguistic content, partner performance and capabilities, conversational interaction, partner identity and role, vocal qualities and behavioral affordances. Through these themes, it is clear that users define the capabilities of speech interfaces differently to humans, seeing them as more formal, fact based, impersonal and less authentic. Based on the findings, we discuss how the themes help to scaffold, categorise and target research and design efforts, considering the appropriateness of emulating humanness.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3338286.3340116

Cites

35 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The study's data demonstrate that older adults adopt human dialogue as a metaphor for interaction with VAs.

    “Our data demonstrate that older adults adopt human dialogue as a metaphor for interaction with VAs [14, 18]”

    From Situated Understanding of Errors in Older Adults' Interactions with Voice Assistants: A Month-Long, In-Home Study (2026) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Discussion (p. 8) describes human dialogue as a metaphor for speech-interface interaction, and the background section (p. 2) reports that users may initially use that metaphor. But the study did not demonstrate this for older adults: its Method (p. 3) reports 21 participants with a mean age of 23.1 years. The specific metaphor finding on p. 2 is attributed to prior qualitative work, not presented as a result of this study's data. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. [8][8] Justine Cassell. 2001. Embodied conversational agents: representation and intelligence in user interfaces. AI magazine 22, 4 (2001), 67. -
  2. [14][14] Benjamin R Cowan and Holly P Branigan. 2015. Does voice anthropomorphism affect lexical alignment in speech-based human-computer dialogue?. In Sixteenth Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association . -
  3. [20][20] Mateusz Dubiel, Martin Halvey, and Leif Azzopardi. 2018. A Survey Investigating Usage of Virtual Personal Assistants. arXiv:1807.04606 [cs] (July 2018). http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.04606 arXiv: 1807.04606. - · arXiv
  4. [21][21] Jens Edlund, Julia Bell Hirschberg, and Mattias Heldner. 2009. Pause and gap length in face-to-face interaction. Columbia University (2009). https://doi.org/10.7916/d82f7wt9 - · DOI
  5. [22][22] Daniel Fallman and John Waterworth. 2010. Capturing user experiences of mobile information technology with the repertory grid technique. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments (2010). -
  6. [24][24] Fay Fransella, Richard Bell, and D Bannister. 2004. Amanual for repertory grid technique . Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. OCLC: 53978922. -
  7. [25][25] Moojan Ghafurian, Neil Budnarain, and Jesse Hoey. 2019. Role of Emotions in Perception of Humanness of Virtual Agents. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems . International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 1979-1981. -
  8. [27][27] Nick Haslam. 2006. Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and social psychology review 10, 3 (2006), 252-264. -
  9. [31][31] Devi Jankowicz. 2004. The easy guide to repertory grids . Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, England ; Hoboken, N.J. -
  10. [32][32] George Kelly. 1991. The psychology of personal constructs. Vol. 2, Vol. 2, . Routledge in association with the Centre for Personal Construct Psychology, London; New York. OCLC: 973052807. -
  11. [41][41] Masahiro Mori, Karl F MacDorman, and Norri Kageki. 1970. 2012. The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]. Robotics & Automation Magazine, IEEE 19, 2 (1970), 2012. -
  12. [43][43] Ioannis Papaioannou, Amanda Cercas Curry, Jose L Part, Igor Shalyminov, Xinnuo Xu, Yanchao Yu, Ondrej Dušek, Verena Rieser, and Oliver Lemon. 2017. Alana: Social dialogue using an ensemble model and a ranker trained on user feedback. Alexa Prize Proceedings (2017). -
  13. [46][46] Valentin Schwind, Katrin Wolf, and Niels Henze. 2018. Avoiding the uncanny valley in virtual character design. interactions 25, 5 (2018), 45-49. -
  14. [52][52] Jakub Aleksander Zlotowski, Hidenobu Sumioka, Shuichi Nishio, Dylan F Glas, Christoph Bartneck, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2015. Persistence of the uncanny valley: the influence of repeated interactions and a robot's attitude on its perception. Frontiers in psychology 6 (2015), 883. This figure "sample-franklin.png" is available in "png" format from: http://arxiv.org/ps/1907.11585v2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doyle, P. R., Edwards, J., Dumbleton, O., Clark, L., & Cowan, B. R.
Affiliations
University College Dublin (IE)
Venue
Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-10
Pages
1-12
OpenAlex
W2965031209
Cited by
100
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8
FWCI
3.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Voysis ltd (EBP/2017/513)
  • Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (EBP/2017/513)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
humanness, virtual assistants, speech interfaces, user perception, human-computer interaction, repertory grid technique, human connection, voice quality, partner identity, conversation

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