Machines and Mindlessness

Following Langer (1992), this article reviews a series of experimental studiesthat demonstrate that individuals mindlessly apply social rules and expecta-tions to computers. The first set of studies illustrates how individuals overusehuman social categories, applying gender stereotypes to computers and ethnicallyidentifying with computer agents. The second set demonstrates that people exhibitoverlearned social behaviors such as politeness and reciprocity toward comput-ers.Inthethirdsetofstudies,prematurecognitivecommitmentsaredemonstrated:Aspecialisttelevisionsetisperceivedasprovidingbettercontentthanageneralisttelevision set. A final series of studies demonstrates the depth of social responseswith respect to computer “personality.” Alternative explanations for these find -ings, such as anthropomorphism and intentional social responses, cannot explainthe results. We conclude with an agenda for future research.Computer users approach the personal computer in many different ways.Experienced word processors move smoothly from keyboard to mouse to menu,mixing prose and commands to the computer automatically; the distinctionbetween the hand and the tool blurs (Heidegger, 1977; Winograd & Flores, 1987).Novices cautiously strike each key, fearing that one false move will initiate anuncontrollable series of unwanted events. Game players view computers as

[1]  William Shakespeare,et al.  Complete Works of William Shakespeare , 1854 .

[2]  G. Mead,et al.  Mind, Self and Society. From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. , 1935 .

[3]  R. Morrison Mind, Self and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist , 1936 .

[4]  A. Gouldner THE NORM OF RECIPROCITY: A PRELIMINARY STATEMENT * , 1960 .

[5]  J. Ruesch Social process. , 1966, Archives of general psychiatry.

[6]  P. Ekman,et al.  Emotion in the Human Face: Guidelines for Research and an Integration of Findings , 1972 .

[7]  Descriptors Higher Annual Meeting of the International Communication Association , 1974 .

[8]  H. Tajfel Social identity and intergroup behaviour , 1974 .

[9]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[10]  Jeanne Marecek,et al.  When Stereotypes Hurt: Three Studies of Penalties for Sex-Role Reversals. , 1975 .

[11]  M. Heidegger The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays , 1977 .

[12]  J. Weizenbaum Computer Power And Human Reason: From Judgement To Calculation , 1978 .

[13]  E. Langer,et al.  The Mindlessness of Ostensibly Thoughtful Action: The Role of "Placebic" Information in Interpersonal Interaction , 1978 .

[14]  Madeline E. Heilman,et al.  High school students' occupational interest as a function of projected sex ratios in male-dominated occupations. , 1979 .

[15]  S. Bem Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. , 1981 .

[16]  Wendy Wood,et al.  Inferred sex differences in status as a determinant of gender stereotypes about social influence. , 1982 .

[17]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models: Towards a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness , 1985 .

[18]  P. N. Shapiro,et al.  Role of out-group cues in determining social identity. , 1984 .

[19]  R. Cialdini Influence: Science and Practice , 1984 .

[20]  Suzanne K. Damarin,et al.  The second self: Computers and the human spirit , 1985 .

[21]  Terry Winograd,et al.  Understanding computers and cognition - a new foundation for design , 1987 .

[22]  T. Dolan The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge: Biographia Literaria or Biographical Sketches of My Literary Life and Opinions , 1986 .

[23]  M. Csíkszentmihályi,et al.  Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. , 1988 .

[24]  S. Barley The Social Construction of a Machine: Ritual, Superstition, Magical Thinking and other Pragmatic Responses to Running a CT Scanner , 1988 .

[25]  S. Brison The Intentional Stance , 1989 .

[26]  Edward E. Smith Concepts and induction , 1989 .

[27]  Clifford Nass,et al.  On the Study of Technology and Task: A Variable-Based Approach , 1990 .

[28]  S Wapner,et al.  Cherished Possessions and Adaptation of Older People to Nursing Homes , 1990, International journal of aging & human development.

[29]  R. Shepard Mind sights: Original visual illusions, ambiguities, and other anomalies, with a commentary on the play of mind in perception and art , 1990 .

[30]  E. Sherman,et al.  Reminiscentia: Cherished Objects as Memorabilia in Late-Life Reminiscence , 1991, International journal of aging & human development.

[31]  D. Gilbert How mental systems believe. , 1991 .

[32]  R. Cialdini,et al.  When tactical pronouncements of change become real change : the case of reciprocal persuasion , 1992 .

[33]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Turn Signals Are The Facial Expressions Of Automobiles , 1992 .

[34]  Jonathan Steuer,et al.  Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence , 1992 .

[35]  E. Langer,et al.  Matters of mind: Mindfulness/mindlessness in perspective , 1992, Consciousness and Cognition.

[36]  R. Cialdini Influence: Science and practice, 3rd ed. , 1993 .

[37]  A. D. Manning,et al.  Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art , 1993 .

[38]  Noëlle Carbonell,et al.  User Representations of Computer Systems in Human-Computer Speech Interaction , 1993, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[39]  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..

[40]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Can computer personalities be human personalities? , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[41]  S. Kiesler,et al.  A prisoner's dilemma experiment on cooperation with people and human-like computers. , 1996, Journal of personality and social psychology.

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

[43]  The meaning and significance of women's experience of their cherished personal possessions , 1996 .

[44]  A. E. Kelly,et al.  Consequences of revealing personal secrets. , 1996 .

[45]  Clifford Nass,et al.  The media equation - how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places , 1996 .

[46]  Rosalind W. Picard Affective Computing , 1997 .

[47]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Are Computers Gender-Neutral? Gender Stereotypic Responses to Computers , 1997 .

[48]  W. Wallace The future of ethnicity, race, and nationality , 1999 .

[49]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  How users reciprocate to computers: an experiment that demonstrates behavior change , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[50]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Are computers scapegoats? Attributions of responsibility in human-computer interaction , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[51]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Charismatic computers: creating more likable and persuasive interactive technologies by leveraging principles from social psychology , 1998 .

[52]  W. Wallace The future of ethnicity, race, and nationality , 1999 .

[53]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Effects of Humor in Task-Oriented Human-Computer Interaction and Computer-Mediated Communication: A Direct Test of SRCT Theory , 1999, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[54]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Maximized Modality or constrained consistency? , 1999, AVSP.

[55]  Youngme Moon Intimate Exchanges: Using Computers to Elicit Self-Disclosure from Consumers , 2000 .

[56]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Consistency of personality in interactive characters: verbal cues, non-verbal cues, and user characteristics , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[57]  C. Nass,et al.  Truth is beauty: researching embodied conversational agents , 2001 .

[58]  Joseph P. Olive The talking computer: text to speech synthesis , 2001 .