Adaptive language behavior in HCl: How expectations and beliefs about a system affect users' word choice

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn 2, Issue , 2006, Pages 1177-1180

  Pearson, Jamie ^a   Hu, Jiang ^b   Branigan, Holly P ^a   Pickering, Martin J ^a   Nass, Clifford I ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Alignment; HCI; Interaction technologies; Language behavior; Natural language

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; INTERACTION TECHNOLOGIES; LANGUAGE BEHAVIOR; NATURAL LANGUAGE;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; HUMAN ENGINEERING; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; SPEECH; SPEECH COMMUNICATION;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 33745822829     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (15)

1. Bell, L. Linguistic adaptations in spoken human-computer dialogues: Empirical studies of user behavior. Doctoral dissertation. Department of Speech, Music and Hearing, KTH, Stockholm. 2003.
2. Branigan, H.P., Pickering, M.J., Pearson, J., McLean, J.F., Nass, C.I., and Hu, J. Beliefs about mental states in lexical and syntactic alignment: Evidence from human-computer dialogs. Proc. CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing 2004.
3. Brennan, S.E. Conversation with and through computers. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 1 (1991), 67-86.
4. Brennan, S.E., and Clark, H.H. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22 (1996), 1482-1493.
5. Einstein robot the star of high-tech show. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10085890/from/RL.3/
6. Garrod, S.C. and Anderson, A. Saying what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic co-ordination. Cognition, 27(1987), 181-218.
7. Guindon, R., Shuldberg, K. and Conner, J. Grammatical and ungrammatical structures in user-adviser dialogues: Evidence for sufficiency of restricted languages in natural language interfaces to advisory systems. Proc. 25th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Association of Computational Linguistics (1987), 41-44.
8. Landis, J.R., Koch, G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33 (1977), 159-174.
9. Mori, M. The Buddha in the robot. Boston: Tuttle Publishing, 1982.
10. Nass, C.I., and Brave, S.B. Wired for speech: How voice activates and enhances the human-computer relationship. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2005.
11. Pickering, M.J., and Garrod, S. Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27(2004), 169-226.
12. Richards, M.A. and Underwood, K.M. How should people and computers speak to one another? Proc. Interact 1984, IFIP (1984), 33-36.
13. Street, R.L. and Brady, R.M. Speech rate acceptance ranges as a function of evaluative domain, listener speech rate, and communication context. Communication Monographs, 49 (1982), 290-308.
14. Walker, M., Fromer, J., Di Frabbrizio, G., Mestel, C. and Hindle, D. What can I say?: Evaluating a spoken language interface to email. Proc. CHI 1998, ACM Press (1998), 582-589.
15. Wang, Q.Y., Nass, C., and Hu, J. Natural language query vs. keyword search: Effects of task complexity on search performance, user perceptions and preferences. Proc. Interact 2005, IPIF (2005), 106-116.