Media inequality in conversation: how people behave differently when interacting with computers and people

ABSTRACT

How is interacting with computer programs different from interacting with people? One answer in the literature is that these two types of interactions are similar. The present study challenges this perspective with a laboratory experiment grounded in the principles of Interpersonal Theory, a psychological approach to interpersonal dynamics. Participants had a text-based, structured conversation with a computer that gave scripted conversational responses. The main manipulation was whether participants were told that they were interacting with a computer program or a person in the room next door. Discourse analyses revealed a key difference in participants' behavior -- when participants believed they were talking to a person, they showed many more of the kinds of behaviors associated with establishing the interpersonal nature of a relationship. This finding has important implications for the design of technologies intended to take on social roles or characteristics.

REFERENCES

• 1: Berzins, J. I. (1977). Therapist-patient matching. In A. S. Gurman (Ed.), Effective psychotherapy (pp. 221--251). New York: Pergamon.
• 2: Blatt, S. J. (1990). Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition: Two personality configurations and their implications for psychopathology and psychotherapy. In J. L. Singer (Ed.), Repression and dissociation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• 3: Carson, R. (1969). Interaction concepts of personality. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company.
• 4: Clark, H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• 5: Dryer, D. C., & Horowitz, L. M. (1997). When do opposites attract? Interpersonal complementarity versus similarity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 72, 592--603.
• 6: Hobbs, J. R., & Evans, D. A. (1980). Conversation as planned behavior. Cognitive Science, 4, 349--377.
• 7: Horowitz, L. (in press). An interpersonal approach to psychopathology. Washington D.C.: APA Books.
• 8: Kiesler, D. (1996). Contemporary interpersonal theory and research. New York: Wiley.
• 9: Lafferty, J., & Eady, P. (1974). The desert survival problem. Plymouth, MI: Experimental Learning Methods.
• 10: LaForge, R., & Suczek, R. F. (1955). The interpersonal domain of personality: An interpersonal checklist. Journal of Personality, 24.
• 11: Leary, T. (1957). Interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press Co.
• 12: Moon, Y. (2000). Intimate exchanges: Using computers to elicit self-disclosure from consumers. Journal of Consumer Research.
• 13: Morkes, J., Kernal, H. K., & Nass, C. (1999). Effects of humor in task-oriented human-computer interactions and computer-mediated communication: A direct test of SRCT theory. Human-Computer Interaction, 14, 395--435.
• 14: Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 81--103.
• 15: Clifford Nass , Katherine . Isbister , Eun-Ju Lee, Truth is beauty: researching embodied conversational agents, Embodied conversational agents, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2001
• 16: Clifford Nass , B. J. Fogg , Youngme Moon, Can computers be teammates?, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.45 n.6, p.669-678, Dec. 1996 [doi>10.1006/ijhc.1996.0073]
• 17: Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Carney, P. (1999). Are people polite to computers? Responses to computer-based interviewing systems. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1093--1110.
• 18: Clifford Nass , Youngme Moon , B. J. Fogg , Byron Reeves , D. Christopher Dryer, Can computer personalities be human personalities?, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.43 n.2, p.223-239, Aug. 1995 [doi>10.1006/ijhc.1995.1042]
• 19: Person, E. (2000). The effect of polite language on the assertive person's reaction to advice. Stanford: Stanford University.
• 20: Byron Reeves , Clifford Nass, The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1996
• 21: Sullivan, H. S. (1953). The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: Norton.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Natural language

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques
          Subjects: User interfaces

  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
          Subjects: Human factors; Human information processing
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)
          Subjects: Theory and methods
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces
          Subjects: Theory and models; Synchronous interaction; Web-based interaction

  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.7 Natural Language Processing
          Subjects: Discourse

  J. Computer Applications
  J.4 SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
      Subjects: Psychology

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.4 COMPUTERS AND SOCIETY
      K.4.m Miscellaneous

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Theory

Keywords:
CMC, assertiveness, computer-mediated communication, computers are social actors, discourse analysis, experimental methods, human-human interaction, interaction design, interpersonal theory, personality, social interfaces, social responses to communication technologies