Advertisement

International Journal of Speech Technology

, Volume 7, Issue 1, pp 9–24 | Cite as

A Comparison of Dialog Strategies for Call Routing

  • Jason D. Williams
  • Silke M. Witt
Article

Abstract

Advances in commercially-available ASR technology have enabled the deployment of “How-may-I-help-you?” interactions to automate call routing. While often preferred to menu-based or directed dialog strategies, there is little quantitative research into the relationships among prompt style, task completion, user preference/satisfaction, and domain. This work applies several dialog strategies to two domains, drawing on both real callers and usability subjects. We find that longer greetings produce higher levels of first-utterance routability. Further, we show that a menu-based dialog strategy produces a uniformly high level of routability at the first utterance in two domains, whereas an open-dialog approach varies significantly with domain. In a domain where users lack an expectation of task structure, users are most successful with a directed strategy, for which preference scores are highest, even though it does not result in the shortest dialogs. Callers rarely provide more than one piece of information in their responses to all types of dialog strategies. Finally, a structured dialog repair prompt is most helpful to callers who were greeted with an open prompt, and least helpful to callers who were greeted with a structured prompt.

call routing call steering dialogue strategy prompt design natural language earcon 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Carpenter, B. and Chu-Carroll, J. (1998). Natural language call routing: A robust self-organizing approach. Proceedings of ICSLP 1998. Sydney, Australia: ICSLP.Google Scholar
  2. Litman, D.J., Pan, S, and Walker, M.A. (1998). Evaluating response strategies in a web-based spoken dialogue agent. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL'98). Montreal, Canada: ACL, pp. 780–786.Google Scholar
  3. Lowry, R. (2003). Concepts and Applications of Inferential Statistics. Vassar College. On-line textbook. http://faculty.vassar.edu/ lowry/webtext.html.Google Scholar
  4. McInnes, F.R., Nairn, I.A., Attwater, D.J., and Jack, M.A. (1999). Effects of prompt style on user responses to an automated banking service using word spotting. BT Technical Journal, 7(1): 160–171.Google Scholar
  5. Sheeder, T. and Balough, J (2003). Say it like you mean it: Priming for structure in caller responses to a spoken dialog system. International Journal of Speech Technology, (6): 103-111.Google Scholar
  6. Swerts, M., Litman, D.J., and Hirschberg, J. (2000). Corrections in spoken dialogue systems. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP 2000), Volume II. Beijing, China: ICSLP, pp. 615–618.Google Scholar
  7. Vanhoucke, V., Neely, W.L., Mortati, M, Sloan, M.J., and Nass, C. (2001). Effects of prompt style when navigating through structured data (paper and presentation). Proceedings of INTERACT 2001, Eighth IFIP TC13 Conference on Human Computer Interaction. Tokyo, Japan: IOS Press, pp. 530–536.Google Scholar
  8. Williams, J., Shaw, A.T., Piano, L., and Abt, M. (2003a). Evaluating real callers' reactions to Open and Directed Strategy prompts. AVIOS 2003 Proceedings. San Jose, CA: AVIOS.Google Scholar
  9. Williams, J., Shaw, A.T., Piano, L., and Abt, M. (2003b). Perception, and Task Completion of Open, Menu-based, and Directed Prompts for Call Routing: A Case Study. Eurospeech, September 2003, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  10. Witt, S. and Williams, J. (2003). Two Studies of Open vs. Directed Dialog Strategies in Spoken Dialog Systems. Eurospeech, September 2003, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason D. Williams
    • 1
  • Silke M. Witt
    • 1
  1. 1.Natural Language Solutions Group, Edify CorpSanta ClaraUSA

Personalised recommendations