Exploring the Applicability of Elaborateness and Indirectness in Dialogue Management

  • Louisa PragstEmail author
  • Wolfgang Minker
  • Stefan Ultes
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 510)


In this paper, we investigate the applicability of soft changes to system behaviour, namely changing the amount of elaborateness and indirectness displayed. To this end, we examine the impact of elaborateness and indirectness on the perception of human-computer communication in a user study. Here, we show that elaborateness and indirectness influence the user’s impression of a dialogue and discuss the implications of our results for adaptive dialogue management. We conclude that elaborateness and indirectness offer valuable possibilities for adaptation and should be incorporated in adaptive dialogue management.


Communication style Dialogue management User study 



This paper is part of a project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 645012.


  1. 1.
    André E, Rehm M, Minker W, Bühler D (2004) Endowing spoken language dialogue systems with emotional intelligence. In: Affective dialogue systems. Springer, pp 178–187Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertrand G, Nothdurft F, Minker W, Traue H, Walter S (2011) Adapting dialogue to user emotion-a wizard-of-oz study for adaptation strategies. In: Proceedings of IWSDS, pp 285–294Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chu-Carroll J (2000) Mimic: an adaptive mixed initiative spoken dialogue system for information queries. In: Proceedings of the sixth conference on applied natural language processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp 97–104Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Damian I, Endrass B, Huber P, Bee N, André E (2011) Individualizing agent interactions. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on motion in games (MIG 2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gnjatović M, Rösner D (2008) Adaptive dialogue management in the NIMITEK prototype system. In: Perception in multimodal dialogue systems. Springer, pp 14–25Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jaksic N, Branco P, Stephenson P, Encarnação LM (2006) The effectiveness of social agents in reducing user frustration. In: CHI’06 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, pp 917–922Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kousidis S, Kennington C, Baumann T, Buschmeier H, Kopp S, Schlangen D (2014) A multimodal in-car dialogue system that tracks the driver’s attention. In: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on multimodal interaction. ACM, pp 26–33Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saerbeck M, Schut T, Bartneck C, Janse MD (2010) Expressive robots in education: varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, pp 1613–1622Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Turunen M, Hakulinen J (2001) Agent-based adaptive interaction and dialogue management architecture for speech applications. In: Text, speech and dialogue. Springer, pp 357–364Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ultes S, Minker W (2014) Managing adaptive spoken dialogue for intelligent environments. J Ambient Intell Smart Environ 6(5):523–539Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ulm UniversityUlmGermany
  2. 2.Cambridge UniversityCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations