THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN INSTRUMENT TO MEASURE ANIMATION PREDISPOSITION OF USERS OF ANIMATED AGENTS IN MS OFFICE

Even the most advanced users may experience anxiety, hesitation, and fear when they interact with computers (Seaward, 1998). People constantly have to upgrade their skills, learn new versions of software or totally new products, understand complex interfaces, and change their human-computer interaction (HCI) behavior. In order to address the challenging task of supporting users in their interactions with computer systems, software designers supply their software applications with help features. The goal of help systems is to provide users with important, useful, timely, and easy-to-understand information within the very specific context of a user’s lack of adeptness or familiarity with a particular task (Randall & Pedersen, 1998). Early help facilities represented paper documentation, books, reference guides, and tutorials. In the 1980s, software products began to have some sort of embedded software-based assistance marketed under the label of ‘online help’ (Bergman & Keene-Moore, 1985). Help authors aimed to improve a system’s usability, experimented with different ways to present information, and emphasized user-friendliness of help facilities. In the 1990s, action-sensitive, context-aware, artificial intelligence-based, and intelligent coaching help systems emerged (Breuker, 1998). The purpose of those help applications was to predict when a user needs assistance rather than passively waiting for a request. For example, the incorporation of context-sensitive tool tips has shown to be a good way to improve the usability of virtually any interfaces including Webpages. The implementation of clickable icons or ‘show me’ buttons does not require an individual to switch from one interface to another which reduces his or her cognitive load, improves productivity, and increases satisfaction with the system (Chalmers, 2003). For the past decade, researchers have begun to experiment with the incorporation of animated, human, or cartoon-like agents in the graphical user interface of help systems.

[1]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Agents that reduce work and information overload , 1994, CACM.

[2]  James C. Lester,et al.  Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments , 2000 .

[3]  James C. Lester,et al.  Deictic Believability: Coordinated Gesture, Locomotion, and Speech in Lifelike Pedagogical Agents , 1999, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[4]  Marc Alexa,et al.  Face-to-face with your assistant. Realization issues of animated user interface agents for home appliances , 2001, Comput. Graph..

[5]  Steven R. Howe,et al.  The Electronic Mirror: Human-Computer Interaction and Change in Self-Appraisals , 1998 .

[6]  S. Fiske,et al.  Social Psychology , 2019, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[7]  Thomas W. Malone,et al.  Heuristics for designing enjoyable user interfaces: Lessons from computer games , 1982, CHI '82.

[8]  Joseph J. Martocchio,et al.  Microcomputer playfulness: development of a measure with workplace implications , 1992 .

[9]  T. Koda,et al.  Agents with faces: the effect of personification , 1996, Proceedings 5th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication. RO-MAN'96 TSUKUBA.

[10]  Hans Bergman,et al.  The birth of a HELP system , 1985, ACM '85.

[11]  Demetri Terzopoulos,et al.  Artificial life for computer graphics , 1999, CACM.

[12]  John Funge,et al.  Cognitive modeling for games and animation , 2000, CACM.

[13]  Jayne Pilling,et al.  A Reader In Animation Studies , 1998 .

[14]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Artificial life meets entertainment: lifelike autonomous agents , 1995, CACM.

[15]  J. Ohya,et al.  The representation of agents: a study of phenomena in virtual environments , 1995, Proceedings 4th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication.

[16]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Learning Interface Agents , 1993, AAAI.

[17]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validating Instruments in MIS Research , 1989, MIS Q..

[18]  R. Cattell The Description and Measurement of Personality , 1947, Mental Health.

[19]  Scotty D. Craig,et al.  Incorporating Human-like Conversational Behaviors into AutoTutor , 2000 .

[20]  J. M. Digman PERSONALITY STRUCTURE: EMERGENCE OF THE FIVE-FACTOR MODEL , 1990 .

[21]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[22]  Richard Keeble,et al.  Assistant agents for the world wide web intelligent interface design challenges , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[23]  Richard D. Johnson,et al.  A theoretical model of differential social attributions toward computing technology: when the metaphor becomes the model , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[24]  Marty Robertson Seaward Interactive assistants provide ease of use for novices: the development of prototypes and descendants , 1998 .

[25]  Wynne W. Chin The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. , 1998 .

[26]  Richard,et al.  Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace , 2022 .

[27]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice , 2000, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[28]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  The respective roles of perceived usefulness and perceived fun in the acceptance of microcomputer technology , 1994, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[29]  Mervyn A. Jack,et al.  Evaluating humanoid synthetic agents in e-retail applications , 2001, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[30]  BenbasatIzak,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991 .

[31]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Machines, social attributions, and ethopoeia: performance assessments of computers subsequent to "self-" or "other-" evaluations , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[32]  James C. Lester,et al.  The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents , 1997, CHI.

[33]  Susanne van Mulken,et al.  The impact of animated interface agents: a review of empirical research , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[34]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior , 1980 .

[35]  Patricia A. Chalmers,et al.  The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  Akikazu Takeuchi,et al.  Situated facial displays: towards social interaction , 1995, CHI '95.

[37]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Letizia: An Agent That Assists Web Browsing , 1995, IJCAI.

[38]  Ritu Agarwal,et al.  A Conceptual and Operational Definition of Personal Innovativeness in the Domain of Information Technology , 1998, Inf. Syst. Res..

[39]  Jordan B. Pollack,et al.  Evolving L-systems to generate virtual creatures , 2001, Comput. Graph..

[40]  Jun Ohya,et al.  The representation of agents: anthropomorphism, agency, and intelligence , 1996, CHI Conference Companion.

[41]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Principles of survey research: part 5: populations and samples , 2002, SOEN.

[42]  João Eduardo Kögler,et al.  An artificial life approach for the animation of cognitive characters , 2001, Comput. Graph..

[43]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[44]  Donaldo de Souza Dias Managers’ motivation for using information technology , 1998 .

[45]  D. Kendrick,et al.  Personality Structure and Measurement , 1970, Mental Health.

[46]  H. J. Institute Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Individual Differences: The Three Major Dimensions of Personality , 2005 .

[47]  Brian R. Duffy,et al.  Anthropomorphism and the social robot , 2003, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[48]  Maxim J. Schlossberg,et al.  Society and Personality: An Interactionist Approach to Social Psychology. , 1989 .

[49]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[50]  Neil Randall,et al.  Who exactly is trying to help us? The ethos of help systems in popular computer applications , 1998, SIGDOC '98.

[51]  Magid Igbaria,et al.  A Motivational Model of Microcomputer Usage , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[52]  D. Magnusson Toward A Psychology of Situations : An Interactional Perspective , 1981 .

[53]  J.A.P.J. Breuker What are intelligent coaching systems and why are they (in)evitable , 1998 .

[54]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Anthropomorphism, agency, and ethopoeia: computers as social actors , 1993, INTERCHI Adjunct Proceedings.

[55]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Interactivity in human–computer interaction: a study of credibility, understanding, and influence , 2000 .

[56]  Ass,et al.  Can computers be teammates? , 1996 .

[57]  Maarten van Dantzich,et al.  1. Lifelike Computer Characters: the Persona project at Microsoft Research , 1997 .

[58]  Christian Couturier,et al.  Internet consumer value of university students: E-mail-vs.-Web users , 2002 .

[59]  Marc Cavazza,et al.  Character-Based Interactive Storytelling , 2002, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[60]  Hun Choi,et al.  An empirical study on the adoption of information appliances with a focus on interactive TV , 2003, Telematics Informatics.

[61]  M. Csíkszentmihályi Beyond boredom and anxiety , 1975 .

[62]  Thomas Rist,et al.  Adding animated presentation agents to the interface , 1997, IUI '97.