CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 399Social Robot Interaction and HRIInnovative Human-Technology InteractionAI in Service Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

When the Interface Is a Face

Sproull, Lee, Subramani, Mani, Kiesler, Sara, Walker, Janet, Waters, Keith·1996·Human-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1207/s15327051hci1102_1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

People behave differently in the presence of other people than they do when they are alone. People also may behave differently when designers introduce more human-like qualities into computer interfaces. In an experimental study we demonstrate that people's responses to a talking-face interface differ from their responses to a text-display interface. They attribute some personality traits to it; they are more aroused by it; they present themselves in a more positive light. We use theories of person perception, social facilitation, and self-presentation to predict and interpret these results. We suggest that as computer interfaces become more "human-like," people who use those interfaces may change their own personas in response to them.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327051hci1102_1

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 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

Show all 49 references

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Backstrom, C. H. & Hursh-Cesar, G. (1981). Survey research (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
  2. Deiner, E., Fraser, S. C., Beaman, A. L. & Kelem, R. T. (1976). Effects of deindividusting variables on stealing by Halloween Mck-or-treaters. Journal of PGrsomZily and SoGfal ~ d r o l o ~ , 33,178-183.
  3. Hall, A. (1979). Gender, gender roles, and nonverbal communication skills. In R. d osenthal (Ed.), Skid in ~nwrbal cmmunicatidn (pp. 32-67). Cambridge, MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.
  4. Holroyd K. A., 1978, Cognitive TlCrrapr and Research, 3, 165
  5. Kiesler S., 1986, Arblic Opinion Quarterly, 50, 243
  6. 10.1037//0033-295X.98.2.164 · DOI
  7. Oren, T., Salomon, G. & Kreitman, K. (1990). Guides: Characterizing the interface. In B. Laurel (Ed.), Tlu art of human-computcr interface d u e (pp. 367-381). New York: Addison-Wesley.
  8. O'Sullivan M., 1985, Journal of Personality and Social Psyhlogy, 48, 5442
  9. Snell W. E., Jr., 1989, Scx Rolcs, 27, 467
  10. Zajonc R., 1965, Scicnte, 149, 269

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–398 of 398

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Sproull, L., Subramani, M., Kiesler, S., Walker, J., & Waters, K.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
ORCID
Subramani, Mani
Venue
Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
1996-06-01
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
97-124
ISSN
0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1207/s15327051hci1102_1
OpenAlex
W2121965518
Cited by
399
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 16
FWCI
10.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
person perception, social facilitation, self-presentation, arousal, personality attribution, personas

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