Analysis of Facilitators’ Behaviors in Multi-party Conversations for Constructing a Digital Facilitator System

  • Tsukasa Shiota
  • Takashi Yamamura
  • Kazutaka ShimadaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11000)


In this paper, we analyze characteristics of facilitators from multi-party conversations. The goal of our study is to construct a digital facilitator system that supports consensus-building and management of conversation for high-quality discussions. Therefore, we need facilitator’s knowledge, behavior, and patterns to realize a good digital facilitator. As the 1st step for the purpose, we focus on a macro viewpoint of facilitators’ behaviors on conversation corpora. First, we generate a model based on a decision tree that classifies each participant into a facilitator or a non-facilitator, from conversation corpora. The classification accuracies by the decision trees were 0.642 and 0.737 for two corpora, respectively. The main purpose of the decision tree generation is to extract patterns from imaginable characteristics, namely features for the classifier. Therefore, next, we discuss behaviors of facilitators by analyzing the decision tree manually. In the analysis, we focus on two types of corpora; one is that each participant has a role, such as a project manager, and another is that each participant has no role in the conversation. We investigate the influence of the difference of the setting through the analysis. From the manual analysis, we obtained some common behaviors and some different behaviors about facilitators from two corpora.


Facilitator’s behaviors Multi-party conversation Digital facilitator Macro viewpoint 



This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 17H01840.


  1. 1.
    Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C.J., Olshen, R.A.: Classification and Regression Trees. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1984)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bunt, H., et al.: ISO 24617–2: a semantically-based standard for dialogue annotation. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 430–437 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carletta, J.: Unleashing the killer corpus: experiences in creating the multi-everything AMI meeting corpus. Lang. Resour. Eval. J. 41(2), 181–190 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    DeSanctis, G., Gallupe, R.B.: A foundation for the study of group decision support systems. Manag. Sci. 33(5), 589–609 (1987)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hung, H., Gatica-Perez, D., Huang, Y., Friedland, G.: Estimating the dominant person in multi-party conversations using speaker diarization strategies. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, pp. 2197–2200 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ito, T., Imi, Y., Ito, T., Hideshima, E.: COLLAGREE: a facilitator-mediated large-scale consensus support system. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Collective Intelligence Conference (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ito, T., Imi, Y., Sato, M., Ito, T., Hideshima, E.: Incentive mechanism for managing large-scale internet-based discussions on COLLAGREE. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Collective Intelligence Conference (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kirikihira, R., Shimada, K.: Discussion map with an assistant function for decision-making: a tool supporting consensus-building. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Collaboration Technologies (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klein, M.: Achieving collective intelligence via large-scale on-line argumentation. CCI Working Paper 2007–001, MIT Sloan School of Management 4647–07 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Li, W., Li, Y., He, Q.: Estimating key speaker in meeting speech based on multiple features optimization. Int. J. Sig. Process. Image Process. Pattern Recogn. 8(4), 31–40 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Matsuyama, Y., Akiba, I., Fujie, S., Kobayashi, T.: Four-participant group conversation: a facilitation robot controlling engagement density as the fourth participant. Comput. Speech Lang. 33(1), 1–24 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Okada, S., et al.: Estimating communication skills using dialogue acts and nonverbal features in multiple discussion datasets. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, pp. 169–176 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Omoto, Y., Toda, Y., Ueda, K., Nishida, T.: Analyses of the facilitating behavior by using participant’s agreement and nonverbal behavior. J. Inf. Process. Soc. Japan 52(12), 3659–3670 (2011). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sapru, A., Bourlard, H.: Automatic social role recognition in professional meetings using conditional random fields. In: Proceedings of Interspeech (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yamamura, T., Hino, M., Shimada, K.: Dialogue act annotation and identification in a Japanese multi-party conversation corpus. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Asia Pacific Corpus Linguistics Conference (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yamamura, T., Shimada, K., Kawahara, S.: The Kyutech corpus and topic segmentation using a combined method. In: Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Asian Language Resources, pp. 95–104 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, Q., et al.: Toward a supporting system of communication skill: the influence of functional roles of participants in group discussion. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCII 2017) (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tsukasa Shiota
    • 1
  • Takashi Yamamura
    • 1
  • Kazutaka Shimada
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Artificial IntelligenceKyushu Institute of TechnologyFukuokaJapan

Personalised recommendations