CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11Speech and dialogue systemsSocial Robot Interaction and HRIAI in Service Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Should Voice Agents Be Polite in an Emergency? Investigating Effects of Speech Style and Voice Tone in Emergency Simulation

Kim, Jieun, Fussell, Susan R.·2025·Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3706598.3714203
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3706598.3714203

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 80

  1. William Apple Lynn A Streeter and Robert M Krauss. 1979. Effects of pitch and speech rate on personal attributions. Journal of personality and social psychology 37 5 (1979) 715. · DOI
  2. Kyoko Arai. 2013. How to transmit disaster information effectively: A linguistic perspective on Japan’s Tsunami Warnings and Evacuation Instructions. International journal of disaster risk science 4 (2013) 150–158. · DOI
  3. Dane Archer and Robin M Akert. 1977. Words and everything else: Verbal and nonverbal cues in social interpretation. Journal of personality and social psychology 35 6 (1977) 443. · DOI
  4. 10.1177/154193128302700127 · DOI
  5. Molly Babel Grant McGuire and Joseph King. 2014. Towards a more nuanced view of vocal attractiveness. PloS one 9 2 (2014) e88616. · DOI
  6. Carryl L Baldwin and David Struckman-Johnson. 2002. Impact of speech presentation level on cognitive task performance: Implications for auditory display design. Ergonomics 45 1 (2002) 61–74. · DOI
  7. Christoph Bartneck Dana Kulić Elizabeth Croft and Susana Zoghbi. 2009. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism animacy likeability perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics 1 (2009) 71–81. · DOI · Paper page
  8. Amy L Baylor and Yanghee Kim. 2005. Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 15 2 (2005) 95–115.
  9. 10.1145/3173386.3177009 · DOI
  10. 10.1007/978-3-540-77006-0_1 · DOI
  11. Scott Brave Clifford Nass and Kevin Hutchinson. 2005. Computers that care: investigating the effects of orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. International journal of human-computer studies 62 2 (2005) 161–178. · DOI
  12. Penelope Brown and Stephen C Levinson. 1978. Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction. Cambridge University Press, 56–311.
  13. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085 · DOI
  14. 10.4324/9781003095552 · DOI
  15. Alex Cao Keshav K Chintamani Abhilash K Pandya and R Darin Ellis. 2009. NASA TLX: Software for assessing subjective mental workload. Behavior research methods 41 (2009) 113–117. · DOI
  16. Brett Christenson Christine Ringler and Nancy J Sirianni. 2023. Speaking fast and slow: How speech rate of digital assistants affects likelihood to use. Journal of Business Research 163 (2023) 113907. · DOI
  17. Herbert H Clark and Dale H Schunk. 1980. Polite responses to polite requests. Cognition 8 2 (1980) 111–143. · DOI
  18. Melissa A Cyders and Ayca Coskunpinar. 2010. Is urgency emotionality? Separating urgent behaviors from effects of emotional experiences. Personality and individual differences 48 7 (2010) 839–844. · DOI
  19. 10.1145/3405755.3406120 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1145/3640543.3645202 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Elise Duffau and Jean E Fox Tree. 2024. Expecting politeness: perceptions of voice assistant politeness. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing (2024) 1–23. · DOI
  22. J Edworthy and E Hellier. 2003. Urgency in speech warnings. In Proceedings of the 8th International Congress on Noise as a Public Health Problem. 65–69.
  23. Judy Edworthy Sarah Loxley and Ian Dennis. 1991. Improving auditory warning design: Relationship between warning sound parameters and perceived urgency. Human factors 33 2 (1991) 205–231. · DOI
  24. Grant Fairbanks. 1940. Recent experimental investigations of vocal pitch in speech. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 11 4 (1940) 457–466. · DOI
  25. David R Feinberg Lisa M DeBruine Benedict C Jones and David I Perrett. 2008. The role of femininity and averageness of voice pitch in aesthetic judgments of women’s voices. Perception 37 4 (2008) 615–623. · DOI
  26. Jonas Foehr and Claas Christian Germelmann. 2020. Alexa can I trust you? Exploring consumer paths to trust in smart voice-interaction technologies. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research 5 2 (2020) 181–205. · DOI
  27. Erving Goffman. 1955. On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry 18 3 (1955) 213–231. · DOI
  28. 10.1145/3576840.3578291 · DOI
  29. 10.1163/9789004368811_003 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Peter A Hancock Deborah R Billings Kristin E Schaefer Jessie YC Chen Ewart J De Visser and Raja Parasuraman. 2011. A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human factors 53 5 (2011) 517–527. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Elizabeth Hellier Judy Edworthy Ben Weedon Kathryn Walters and Austin Adams. 2002. The perceived urgency of speech warnings: Semantics versus acoustics. Human Factors 44 1 (2002) 1–17. · DOI
  32. Keith C Hendy Kevin M Hamilton and Lois N Landry. 1993. Measuring subjective workload: when is one scale better than many? Human Factors 35 4 (1993) 579–601. · DOI
  33. Caroline G Henton. 1989. Fact and fiction in the description of female and male pitch. Language and communication 9 4 (1989) 299–311. · DOI
  34. 10.1145/3563359.3596985 · DOI
  35. Thomas Holtgraves. 1997. Styles of language use: Individual and cultural variability in conversational indirectness. Journal of personality and social psychology 73 3 (1997) 624. · DOI
  36. Thomas Holtgraves and Jean-François Bonnefon. 2017. Experimental approaches to linguistic (im) politeness. The Palgrave handbook of linguistic (im) politeness (2017) 381–401. · DOI
  37. Thomas Holtgraves and Yang Joong-Nam. 1990. Politeness as universal: Cross-cultural perceptions of request strategies and inferences based on their use. Journal of personality and social psychology 59 4 (1990) 719. · DOI
  38. 10.1145/3491102.3517525 · DOI
  39. 10.1007/978-3-540-48113-3_11 · DOI
  40. 10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525652 · DOI
  41. Phil-Sik Jang. 2007. Designing acoustic and non-acoustic parameters of synthesized speech warnings to control perceived urgency. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 37 3 (2007) 213–223. · DOI
  42. Navdeep Kaur and Parminder Singh. 2023. Conventional and contemporary approaches used in text to speech synthesis: A review. Artificial Intelligence Review 56 7 (2023) 5837–5880. · DOI
  43. 10.1145/3584931.3606979 · DOI
  44. 10.1109/ICASSP40776.2020.9053255 · DOI
  45. Sherrie Xiao Komiak and Izak Benbasat. 2004. Understanding customer trust in agent-mediated electronic commerce web-mediated electronic commerce and traditional commerce. Information technology and management 5 (2004) 181–207. · DOI
  46. Katharina Kühne Martin H Fischer and Yuefang Zhou. 2020. The human takes it all: Humanlike synthesized voices are perceived as less eerie and more likable. evidence from a subjective ratings study. Frontiers in neurorobotics 14 (2020) 593732. · DOI
  47. Jae-gil Lee and Kwan Min Lee. 2022. Polite speech strategies and their impact on drivers’ trust in autonomous vehicles. Computers in Human Behavior 127 (2022) 107015. · DOI
  48. Namyeon Lee Jeonghun Kim Eunji Kim and Ohbyung Kwon. 2017. The influence of politeness behavior on user compliance with social robots in a healthcare service setting. International Journal of Social Robotics 9 (2017) 727–743. · DOI
  49. Chih-Wei Liu Ai-Yun Hsieh Shao-Kang Lo and Yujong Hwang. 2017. What consumers see when time is running out: Consumers’ browsing behaviors on online shopping websites when under time pressure. Computers in Human Behavior 70 (2017) 391–397. · DOI
  50. Richard E Mayer W Lewis Johnson Erin Shaw and Sahiba Sandhu. 2006. Constructing computer-based tutors that are socially sensitive: Politeness in educational software. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64 1 (2006) 36–42. · DOI
  51. Joann M Montepare and Leslie Zebrowitz-McArthur. 1987. Perceptions of adults with childlike voices in two cultures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 23 4 (1987) 331–349. · DOI
  52. Clifford Nass, Ulla Foehr, Scott Brave, and Michael Somoza. 2001. The effects of emotion of voice in synthesized and recorded speech. In Proceedings of the AAAI symposium emotional and intelligent II: The tangled knot of social cognition. AAAI North Falmouth, MA.
  53. Nora Ni Loideain and Rachel Adams. 2018. From Alexa to Siri and the GDPR: the gendering of virtual personal assistants and the role of EU data protection law. King’s College London Dickson Poon School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series (2018). · DOI
  54. Andreea Niculescu Betsy Van Dijk Anton Nijholt Haizhou Li and Swee Lan See. 2013. Making social robots more attractive: the effects of voice pitch humor and empathy. International journal of social robotics 5 (2013) 171–191. · DOI
  55. 10.1109/iUSEr.2011.6150529 · DOI
  56. 10.1177/1071181311551310 · DOI
  57. Gloria Phillips-Wren and Monica Adya. 2020. Decision making under stress: The role of information overload time pressure complexity and uncertainty. Journal of Decision Systems 29 sup1 (2020) 213–225. · DOI
  58. Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass. 1996. The media equation: How people treat computers television and new media like real people. Cambridge UK 10 10 (1996).
  59. John K Rempel John G Holmes and Mark P Zanna. 1985. Trust in close relationships. Journal of personality and social psychology 49 1 (1985) 95. · DOI · Paper page
  60. Mitchell F Rice. 1980. IRVING L. JANIS and LEON MANN. Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict choice and commitment. PP. VII 488. New York: The Free Press 1977. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 449 1 (1980) 202–203. · DOI
  61. 10.1145/2696454.2696497 · DOI · Paper page
  62. 10.1007/978-3-319-02447-9_91 · DOI
  63. 10.1145/1121241.1121281 · DOI
  64. Annett Schirmer Yenju Feng Antarika Sen and Trevor B Penney. 2019. Angry old male–and trustworthy? How expressive and person voice characteristics shape listener trust. PloS one 14 1 (2019) e0210555. · DOI
  65. Timothy Schoenharl, Greg Madey, Gábor Szabó, and Albert-László Barabási. 2006. WIPER: A multi-agent system for emergency response. In Proceedings of the 3rd International ISCRAM Conference , Vol. 1.
  66. Katie Seaborn Norihisa P Miyake Peter Pennefather and Mihoko Otake-Matsuura. 2021. Voice in human–agent interaction: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54 4 (2021) 1–43. · DOI · Paper page
  67. Victor Kenji M Shiramizu Anthony J Lee Daria Altenburg David R Feinberg and Benedict C Jones. 2022. The role of valence dominance and pitch in perceptions of artificial intelligence (AI) conversational agents’ voices. Scientific Reports 12 1 (2022) 22479. · DOI
  68. 10.1145/1349822.1349843 · DOI
  69. 10.1145/2858036.2858217 · DOI
  70. Xu Tan Jiawei Chen Haohe Liu Jian Cong Chen Zhang Yanqing Liu Xi Wang Yichong Leng Yuanhao Yi Lei He et al. 2024. Naturalspeech: End-to-end text-to-speech synthesis with human-level quality. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (2024). · DOI
  71. 10.1177/1541931215591322 · DOI
  72. 10.1145/3411763.3451623 · DOI · Paper page
  73. Ilaria Torre and Laurence White. 2021. Trust in vocal human–robot interaction: Implications for robot voice design. Voice Attractiveness: Studies on Sexy Likable and Charismatic Speakers (2021) 299–316. · DOI
  74. 10.1109/HRI.2013.6483599 · DOI
  75. Ning Wang W Lewis Johnson Richard E Mayer Paola Rizzo Erin Shaw and Heather Collins. 2008. The politeness effect: Pedagogical agents and learning outcomes. International journal of human-computer studies 66 2 (2008) 98–112. · DOI
  76. 10.1201/9781003069447-2 · DOI
  77. Mun On Wong Hui Zhou Huaquan Ying and Sanghoon Lee. 2022. A voice-driven IMU-enabled BIM-based multi-user system for indoor navigation in fire emergencies. Automation in construction 135 (2022) 104137. · DOI
  78. 10.1109/GHTC.2016.7857344 · DOI
  79. Kun Xu. 2019. First encounter with robot Alpha: How individual differences interact with vocal and kinetic cues in users’ social responses. New Media & Society 21 11-12 (2019) 2522–2547. · DOI
  80. Patricia Youngblood Phillip M Harter Sakti Srivastava Shannon Moffett Wm LeRoy Heinrichs and Parvati Dev. 2008. Design development and evaluation of an online virtual emergency department for training trauma teams. Simulation in Healthcare 3 3 (2008) 146–153. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 11

Metadata

Authors
Kim, J., & Fussell, S. R.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-04-25
Pages
1-17
DOI
10.1145/3706598.3714203
OpenAlex
W4409735427
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6
FWCI
5.69
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
voice assistants, politeness, speech style, tone of voice, emergency simulation, emergency response, chatbots

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