Cited by 25Social Robot Interaction and HRIEmotion and Mood RecognitionAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

Effects of Emotional Expressiveness of a Female Digital Human on Loneliness, Stress, Perceived Support, and Closeness Across Genders: Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Loveys, Kate, Sagar, Mark, Zhang, Xueyuan, Fricchione, Gregory, Broadbent, Elizabeth·2021·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Loneliness is a growing public health problem that has been exacerbated in vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social support interventions have been shown to reduce loneliness, including when delivered through technology. Digital humans are a new type of computer agent that show promise as supportive peers in health care. For digital humans to be effective and engaging support persons, it is important that they develop closeness with people. Closeness can be increased by emotional expressiveness, particularly in female relationships. However, it is unknown whether emotional expressiveness improves relationships with digital humans and affects physiological responses. Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate whether emotional expression by a digital human can affect psychological and physiological outcomes and whether the effects are moderated by the user’s gender. Methods: A community sample of 198 adults (101 women, 95 men, and 2 gender-diverse individuals) was block-randomized by gender to complete a 15-minute self-disclosure conversation with a female digital human in 1 of 6 conditions. In these conditions, the digital human varied in modality richness and emotional expression on the face and in the voice (emotional, neutral, or no face; emotional or neutral voice). Perceived loneliness, closeness, social support, caring perceptions, and stress were measured after each interaction. Heart rate, skin temperature, and electrodermal activity were assessed during each interaction. 3-way factorial analyses of variance with post hoc tests were conducted. Results: Emotional expression in the voice was associated with greater perceptions of caring and physiological arousal during the interaction, and unexpectedly, with lower feelings of support. User gender moderated the effect of emotional expressiveness on several outcomes. For women, an emotional voice was associated with increased closeness, social support, and caring perceptions, whereas for men, a neutral voice increased these outcomes. For women, interacting with a neutral face was associated with lower loneliness and subjective stress compared with no face. Interacting with no face (ie, a voice-only black screen) resulted in lower loneliness and subjective stress for men, compared with a neutral or emotional face. No significant results were found for heart rate or skin temperature. However, average electrodermal activity was significantly higher for men while interacting with an emotional voice. Conclusions: Emotional expressiveness in a female digital human has different effects on loneliness, social, and physiological outcomes for men and women. The results inform the design of digital human support persons and have theoretical implications. Further research is needed to evaluate how more pronounced emotional facial expressions in a digital human might affect the results. Trial Registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12621000865819; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=381816&isReview

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 · 10.2196/30624

Cites

20 of 20 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

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

Authors
Loveys, K., Sagar, M., Zhang, X., Fricchione, G., & Broadbent, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Broadbent, Elizabeth
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2021-11-25
Volume
23
Issue
11
Pages
e30624
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3202645105
Cited by
25
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
virtual humans, emotional expressiveness, loneliness, stress, social support, closeness, gender differences, vocal emotion, facial expressions, self-disclosure, social robots, physiological arousal, electrodermal activity, skin temperature, heart rate, COVID-19 pandemic, gender-diverse people, social support interventions
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adult, Emotions, Female, Humans, Loneliness, Male, Pandemics

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