A Study on Persuasive Effect of Preference of Virtual Agents
A virtual agent can have a graphical appearance and give users nonverbal information such as gestures and facial expressions. A computer system can construct intimate relationship with and credibility from users using virtual agents. Although related work have been discussing how to make users feel better about computers, a room for discussing effectiveness of letting users choose their favorite characters still exists. If a user’s favorite agent is more believable than not favorite one for him/her, the computer system can construct better relationship with the user through an agent. In this paper, we have examined an effect of making user’s favorite agent selectable on his/her behavior by conducting an experiment. We divided participants into four groups according to these conditions and ask them to have a conversation with an agent. As a result, we found a possibility of increasing credibility of an agent from users by letting them choose their favorite one.
The authors would like to thank those who participated our experiment and authors of components and materials.
- 1.Fogg BJ (2003) Persuasive technology. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, BurlingtonGoogle Scholar
- 2.Bickmore T, Cassell J (2001) Relational agents: a model and implementation of building user trust. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI ‘01, New York, USA, ACM 396–403Google Scholar
- 3.Katagiri Y, Takahashi T, Takeuchi Y (2001) Social persuasion in human-agent interaction. In: Second IJCAI (ed) Workshop on knowledge and reasoning in practical dialogue systems, IJCAI-2001. Morgan Kaufman Publishers, Menlo Park, pp 64–69Google Scholar
- 4.Zanbaka C, Goolkasian P, Hodges L (2006) Can a virtual cat persuade you? the role of gender and realism in speaker persuasiveness. In: proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI ‘06, New York, USA, ACM, pp 1153–1162Google Scholar
- 5.Schulman D, Bickmore T (2009) Persuading users through counseling dialogue with a conversational agent. In: persuasive ‘09: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology, New York, USA, ACM, pp 1–8Google Scholar
- 6.Stern SE, Mullennix JW, Dyson Cl, Wilson SJ (1999) The persuasiveness of synthetic speech versus human speech. Human factors: the journal of the human factors and ergonomics society 41(4), pp 588–595Google Scholar
- 7.Prochaska JO, Norcross JC, DiClemente CC (1994) Changing for good. William Morrow, an imprint of Harper Collins PublishersGoogle Scholar