The Impact of Response Wording in Error Correction Subdialogs

Spoken human-machine dialogs are prone to communication failures due to imperfect speech recognition and understanding. In order to recover from these failures, users typically engage in error correction subdialogs. Lengthy error correction subdialogs should be avoided since they increase the overall task completion time and decrease user satisfaction. This study analyzes a large corpus of human-computer dialogs and identifies properties of system responses that affect user frustration and recognition error rates in error correction subdialogs.

[1]  Gregory A. Sanders,et al.  DARPA communicator dialog travel planning systems: the june 2000 data collection , 2001, INTERSPEECH.

[2]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  Corrections in spoken dialogue systems , 2000, INTERSPEECH.

[3]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  Identifying User Corrections Automatically in Spoken Dialogue Systems , 2001, NAACL.

[4]  Julia Hirschberg,et al.  Generalizing prosodic prediction of speech recognition errors , 2000, INTERSPEECH.

[5]  Maxine Eskénazi,et al.  Data collection and processing in the carnegie mellon communicator , 1999, EUROSPEECH.

[6]  Marilyn A. Walker,et al.  What can I say?: evaluating a spoken language interface to Email , 1998, CHI.

[7]  Mikio Nakano,et al.  New feature parameters for detecting misunderstandings in a spoken dialogue system , 2000, INTERSPEECH.

[8]  Hagen Soltau,et al.  On the influence of hyperarticulated speech on recognition performance , 1998, ICSLP.

[9]  Jonathan Klein,et al.  This computer responds to user frustration , 1999, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[10]  S Oviatt,et al.  Linguistic Adaptations During Spoken and Multimodal Error Resolution , 1998, Language and speech.

[11]  Gina-Anne Levow,et al.  Characterizing and Recognizing Spoken Corrections in Human-Computer Dialogue , 1998, ACL.

[12]  Sharon L. Oviatt,et al.  Error resolution during multimodal human-computer interaction , 1996, Proceeding of Fourth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. ICSLP '96.

[13]  Shrikanth S. Narayanan,et al.  Effects of dialog initiative and multi-modal presentation strategies on large directory information access , 2000, INTERSPEECH.

[14]  D. Litman,et al.  Predicting User Reactions to System Error , 2001, ACL.

[15]  S Oviatt,et al.  Modeling global and focal hyperarticulation during human-computer error resolution. , 1998, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[16]  Shrikanth S. Narayanan,et al.  Analysis of user behavior under error conditions in spoken dialogs , 2002, INTERSPEECH.

[17]  Sharon L. Oviatt,et al.  Toward interface design for human language technology: Modality and structure as determinants of linguistic complexity , 1994, Speech Communication.

[18]  Jonathan Klein,et al.  This computer responds to user frustration: Theory, design, and results , 2002, Interact. Comput..

[19]  Andreas Stolcke,et al.  Prosody-based automatic detection of annoyance and frustration in human-computer dialog , 2002, INTERSPEECH.