Cited by 599Emotion and Mood RecognitionMental Health via WritingSpeech and dialogue systems

The distress analysis interview corpus of human and computer interviews

Open access
Gratch, Jonathan, Artstein, Ron, Lucas, Gale, Stratou, Giota, Scherer, Stefan, Nazarian, Angela, Wood, Rachel, Boberg, Jill +5 more·2014·Proceedings of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference

Abstract

The Distress Analysis Interview Corpus (DAIC) contains clinical interviews designed to support the diagnosis of psychological distress conditions such as anxiety, depression, and post traumatic stress disorder. The interviews are conducted by humans, human controlled agents and autonomous agents, and the participants include both distressed and non-distressed individuals. Data collected include audio and video recordings and extensive questionnaire responses; parts of the corpus have been transcribed and annotated for a variety of verbal and non-verbal features. The corpus has been used to support the creation of an automated interviewer agent, and for research on the automatic identification of psychological distress.

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 · 10.63317/3o7bccg9xequ

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • Relational agents built based on the theory of rapport can induce users' openness.

    “Researchers further found that relational agents, which were built based on the theory of rapport, can induce users' openness (77, 78).”

    From Digital Therapeutic Alliance With Fully Automated Mental Health Smartphone Apps: A Narrative Review (2022) · cites this paper as [77]

    The Collection section (p. 2) says the interviews began with questions designed to build rapport and make participants comfortable. The Usage section (p. 5) reports less fear of negative evaluation and impression management when the character was framed as autonomous, which is consistent with greater openness. It does not say the agent was built based on a theory of rapport or show that rapport-based design induced that openness. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    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: 22

  1. Alvarez-Conrad, J., Zoellner, L. A., and Foa, E. B. (2001). Linguistic predictors of trauma pathology and physical health. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 15(7):S159S170.
  2. Blanchard, E. B., Jones-Alexander, J., Buckley, T. C., and Forneris, C. A. (1996). Psychometric properties of the PTSD checklist (PCL). Behaviour Research and Therapy , 34(8):669-673, August.
  3. Brugman, H. and Russel, A. (2004). Annotating multimedia / multi-modal resources with ELAN. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004) , pages 20652068, Lisbon, Portugal, May.
  4. DeVault, D., Georgila, K., Artstein, R., Morbini, F., Traum, D., Scherer, S., Rizzo, A. S., and Morency, L.-P. (2013). Verbal indicators of psychological distress in interactive dialogue with a virtual human. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2013 Conference , pages 193-202, Metz, France, August. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  5. DeVault, D., Artstein, R., Benn, G., Dey, T., Fast, E., Gainer, A., Georgila, K., Gratch, J., Hartholt, A., Lhommet, M., Lucas, G., Marsella, S., Morbini, F., Nazarian, A., Scherer, S., Stratou, G., Suri, A., Traum, D., Wood, R., Xu, Y., Rizzo, A., and Morency, L.-P. (2014). SimSensei kiosk: A virtual human interviewer for healthcare decision support. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'14) , Paris.
  6. Faust, L. and Artstein, R. (2013). People hesitate more, talk less to virtual interviewers than to human interviewers. In Fernández, R. and Isard, A., editors, Semdial 2013 DialDam: Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue , pages 35-43, Amsterdam, December.
  7. Gaudiano, B. A. and Zimmerman, M. (2010). Does comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder affect the severity and course of psychotic major depressive disorder? Journal of Clinical Psychiatry , 71(4):442-450.
  8. Gratch, J., Morency, L.-P., Scherer, S., Stratou, G., Boberg, J., Koenig, S., Adamson, T., and Rizzo, A. (2013). User-state sensing for virtual health agents and telehealth applications. In Westwood, J. D., Westwood, S. W., Felländer-Tsai, L., Haluck, R. S., Robb, R. A., Senger, S., and Vosburgh, K. G., editors, Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 20 , volume 184 of Studies in Health Technology and Informatics , pages 151-157. IOS Press.
  9. Gratch, J., Lucas, G. M., and King, A. (2014a). It's only a computer: Virtual humans increase willingness to disclose. Manuscript under review.
  10. Gratch, J., Lucas, G. M., King, A., and Morency, L.-P. (2014b). It's only a computer: The impact of humanagent interaction in clinical interviews. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS'14) , Paris.
  11. Hall, J. A., Harrigan, J. A., and Rosenthal, R. (1995). Nonverbal behavior in clinician-patient interaction. Applied and Preventive Psychology , 4(1):21-37.
  12. Harris, F. and Lahey, B. (1982). Recording system bias in direct observational methodology: A review and critical analysis of factors causing inaccurate coding behavior. Clinical Psychology Review , 2(4):539-556.
  13. Higgins, E. S. (1994). A review of unrecognized mental illness in primary care: Prevalence, natural history, and efforts to change the course. Archives of Family Medicine , 3(10):908-917, October.
  14. Kang, S.-H. and Gratch, J. (2012). Socially anxious people reveal more personal information with virtual counselors that talk about themselves using intimate human back stories. In Wiederhold, B. and Riva, G., editors, Annual Review of Cybertherapy and Telemedicine 2012 , volume 181, pages 202-207. IOS Press, Amsterdam.
  15. Krippendorff, K. (2011). Agreement and information in the reliability of coding. Communication Methods and Measures , 5(2):93-112.
  16. Scherer, S., Stratou, G., Gratch, J., and Morency, L.P. (2013a). Investigating voice quality as a speakerindependent indicator of depression and PTSD. In Proceedings of Interspeech 2013 , Lyon, France, Augist.
  17. Scherer, S., Stratou, G., Lucas, G. M., Mahmoud, M., Boberg, J., Gratch, J., Rizzo, A., and Morency, L.-P. (2014). Automatic audiovisual behavior descriptors for psychological disorder analysis. Manuscript under review.
  18. Spielberger, C., Gorssuch, R., Lushene, P., Vagg, P., and Jacobs, G. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory . Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc.
  19. Waxer, P. (1974). Nonverbal cues for depression. Journal of Abnormal Psychology , 83(3):319-322.
  20. Wildman, B., Erickson, M., and Kent, R. (1975). The effect of two training procedures on observer agreement and variability of behavior ratings. Child Development , pages 520-524.
  21. Yang, Y., Fairbairn, C., and Cohn, J. (2013). Detecting depression severity from vocal prosody. Affective Computing, IEEE Transactions on , 4(2):142-150.
  22. Yu, Z., Scherer, S., DeVault, D., Gratch, J., Stratou, G., Morency, L.-P., and Cassell, J. (2013). Multimodal prediction of psychological disorders: Learning verbal and nonverbal commonalities in adjacency pairs. In Fernández, R. and Isard, A., editors, Semdial 2013 DialDam: Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue , pages 160-169, Amsterdam, December.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gratch, J., Artstein, R., Lucas, G., Stratou, G., Scherer, S., Nazarian, A., Wood, R., Boberg, J., DeVault, D., Marsella, S., Traum, D., Rizzo, S., & Morency, L.-P.
Venue
Proceedings of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference
Published
2014-05
Pages
3123-3128
ISSN
2522-2686
OpenAlex
W2252180568
Cited by
599
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 92 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 86 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5
FWCI
24.48
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • Language Resources and Evaluation
Funders
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (W911NF-04-D-0005)
  • Research, Development and Engineering Command (W911NF-04-D-0005)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Emotion and Mood Recognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
psychological distress, clinical interview, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, human-computer interaction

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