More than just a pretty face: affordances of embodiment

Prior research into embodied interface agents has found that users like them and find them engaging. In this paper, we argue that embodiment can serve an even stronger function if system designers use actual human conversational protocols in the design of the interface. Communicative behaviors such as salutations and farewells, conversational turn-taking with interruptions, and referring to objects using pointing gestures are examples of protocols that all native speakers of a language already know how to perform and that can thus be leveraged in an intelligent interface. We discuss how these protocols are integrated into Rea, an embodied, multi-modal conversational interface agent who acts as a real-estate salesperson, and we show why embodiment is required for their successful implementation.

[1]  Thomas Rist,et al.  Integrating reactive and scripted behaviors in a life-like presentation agent , 1998, AGENTS '98.

[2]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Animated conversation: rule-based generation of facial expression, gesture & spoken intonation for multiple conversational agents , 1994, SIGGRAPH.

[3]  Justine Cassell,et al.  Embodied Conversation: Integrating Face and Gesture into Automatic Spoken Dialogue Systems , 1998 .

[4]  A. Kendon.  Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters , 1990 .

[5]  Matthew Stone.  Modality in dialogue: planning, pragmatics and computation , 1998 .

[6]  Elizabeth F. Churchill,et al.  Face-to-face interfaces , 1999, CHI EA '99.

[7]  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.

[8]  A. Anderson,et al.  The Effects of Visibility on Dialogue and Performance in a Cooperative Problem Solving Task , 1994 .

[9]  Justine Cassell,et al.  Human conversation as a system framework: designing embodied conversational agents , 2001 .

[10]  J. Cassell,et al.  Communicative humanoids: a computational model of psychosocial dialogue skills , 1996 .

[11]  S. Kiesler,et al.  “Social” human-computer interaction , 1997 .

[12]  Christopher R. Wren,et al.  Real-Time 3-D Tracking of the Human Body , 1996 .

[13]  D. McNeill.  Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal about Thought , 1992 .

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

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

[16]  Kristinn R. Thórisson,et al.  The Power of a Nod and a Glance: Envelope Vs. Emotional Feedback in Animated Conversational Agents , 1999, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[17]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  KQML as an agent communication language , 1994, CIKM '94.

[18]  Yorick Wilks.  Machine Conversations , 1999 .

[19]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Human values and the design of computer technology , 1997 .

[20]  W. Lewis Johnson,et al.  Task-Oriented Dialogs with Animated Agents in Virtual Reality , 1998 .

[21]  K. Chang,et al.  Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea , 1999, CHI '99.

[22]  J. Cassell,et al.  Turn taking vs. Discourse Structure: How Best to Model Multimodal Conversation , 1998 .

[23]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Pfinder: real-time tracking of the human body , 1996, Other Conferences.

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

[25]  Nicole Chovil.  Discourse‐oriented facial displays in conversation , 1991 .