Exploring users' social responses to computer counseling interviewers' behavior

Abstract We explore the effect of behavioral realism and reciprocal self-disclosure from computer interviewers on the social responses of human users in simulated psychotherapeutic counseling interactions. To investigate this subject, we designed a 3 × 3 factorial between-subjects experiment involving three conditions of behavioral realism: high realism, low realism, and audio-only (displaying no behavior at all) and three conditions of reciprocal self-disclosure: high disclosure, low disclosure, and no disclosure. We measured users’ feelings of social presence (Copresence, Social Attraction, and Emotional Credibility), rapport, perception of the quality of users’ own responses (Embarrassment and Self-Performance), emotional state (PANAS), perception of an interaction partner (Person Perception), self-reported self-disclosure, speech fluency (Pause Fillers and Incomplete Words), and Verbal Self-Disclosure. We observed some contradictory outcomes in users’ subjective reports. However, the results of objective data analysis demonstrated that users disclosed greater Verbal Self-Disclosure (medium level of intimacy) when interacting with computer interviewers that displayed high behavioral realism and high self-disclosure. Users also delivered more fluent speech when interacting with computer interviewers that displayed high behavioral realism.

[1]  J. Cassell,et al.  Authorable Virtual Peers for Autism Spectrum Disorders , 2006 .

[2]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[3]  Frank Biocca,et al.  The Effect of the Agency and Anthropomorphism on Users' Sense of Telepresence, Copresence, and Social Presence in Virtual Environments , 2003, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[4]  L. Miller,et al.  Self-disclosure and liking: a meta-analytic review. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[5]  Lee Sproull,et al.  When the Interface Is a Face , 1996, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[6]  Sin-Hwa Kang,et al.  Social copresence in anonymous social interactions using a mobile video telephone , 2008, CHI.

[7]  T. K. Srull,et al.  Person memory and judgment. , 1989, Psychological review.

[8]  Michael E. Bernard,et al.  REBT Assessment and Treatment with Children , 2006 .

[9]  Jeremy N. Bailenson,et al.  The Effect of Behavioral Realism and Form Realism of Real-Time Avatar Faces on Verbal Disclosure, Nonverbal Disclosure, Emotion Recognition, and Copresence in Dyadic Interaction , 2006, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[10]  T. Postmes,et al.  Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization , 2002 .

[11]  J. Walther.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[12]  Aron O'Cass,et al.  A psychometric evaluation of a revised version of the Lennox and Wolfe revised self-monitoring scale , 2000 .

[13]  Ning Wang,et al.  Can Virtual Humans Be More Engaging Than Real Ones? , 2007, HCI.

[14]  Azy Barak,et al.  Degree and Reciprocity of Self-Disclosure in Online Forums , 2007, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[15]  L. Tickle-Degnen,et al.  The Nature of Rapport and Its Nonverbal Correlates , 1990 .

[16]  P. R. Mccarthy,et al.  Differential effects of counselor self-referent responses and counselor status. , 1982 .

[17]  M. Worthy,et al.  Self-disclosure as an exchange process. , 1969 .

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

[19]  M. Clark,et al.  Differences in Social Exchange Between Intimate and Other Relationships: Gradually Evolving or Quickly Apparent? , 1986 .

[20]  Katelyn Y. A. McKenna,et al.  Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the "true self" on the Internet. , 2002 .

[21]  Stacy Marsella,et al.  Virtual Rapport , 2006, IVA.

[22]  O. John,et al.  Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: multitrait multimethod analyses of the Big Five in Spanish and English. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[23]  P. Cozby.  Self-disclosure: a literature review. , 1973, Psychological bulletin.

[24]  Jonathan Gratch,et al.  Virtual humans elicit socially anxious interactants' verbal self‐disclosure , 2010, Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds.

[25]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[26]  Self Book.  Self Disclosure An Experimental Analysis Of The Transparent Self , 2016 .

[27]  Ning Wang,et al.  Creating Rapport with Virtual Agents , 2007, IVA.

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

[29]  Nicole C. Krämer,et al.  "It doesn't matter what you are!" Explaining social effects of agents and avatars , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[30]  C. Nass,et al.  How “Real” Are Computer Personalities? , 1996 .

[31]  Charles S. Carver,et al.  The Self-Consciousness Scale: A revised version for use with general populations. , 1985 .

[32]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[33]  P SeneseV.,et al.  La timidezza: costrutto unidimensionale o multidimensionale? La struttura della versione italiana della Revised Cheek & Buss Shyness Scale (RCBS-14) , 2009 .

[34]  Frederick Plotkin,et al.  I. SELF-DISCLOSURE , 1971 .

[35]  Ning Wang,et al.  Agreeable People Like Agreeable Virtual Humans , 2008, IVA.

[36]  Ning Wang,et al.  Does the contingency of agents' nonverbal feedback affect users' social anxiety? , 2008, AAMAS.

[37]  C. Nass,et al.  Machines and Mindlessness , 2000 .

[38]  I. Altman,et al.  Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships , 1973 .

[39]  Marc A. Brackett,et al.  Emotional Intelligence: Key Readings on the Mayer and Salovey Model , 2004 .

[40]  Kristine L. Nowak.  The Influence of Anthropomorphism and Agency on Social Judgment in Virtual Environments , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[41]  D. Watson,et al.  Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[42]  Timothy W. Bickmore,et al.  Engagement vs. Deceit: Virtual Humans with Human Autobiographies , 2009, IVA.

[43]  S. Weisband.  Group discussion and first advocacy effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision making groups , 1992 .

[44]  C. Berger,et al.  SOME EXPLORATIONS IN INITIAL INTERACTION AND BEYOND: TOWARD A DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY OF INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION , 1975 .

[45]  Hichang Cho,et al.  Deception and Self-Disclosure: The Roles of Self-Awareness, Avatar Similarity and Attraction , 2010 .

[46]  H. Reis,et al.  Intimacy as an interpersonal process. , 1988 .

[47]  Stefan Kopp,et al.  Media Equation Revisited: Do Users Show Polite Reactions towards an Embodied Agent? , 2009, IVA.

[48]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Computers are social actors: a review of current research , 1997 .

[49]  A. Joinson.  Self‐disclosure in computer‐mediated communication: The role of self‐awareness and visual anonymity , 2001 .

[50]  S. Jourard,et al.  Cognition, cathexis, and the dyadic effect in men's self-disclosing behavior. , 1960 .

[51]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Anthropocentrism and computers , 1995, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[52]  Albert A. Rizzo,et al.  An Intelligent Virtual Human System for Providing Healthcare Information and Support , 2011, MMVR.

[53]  Jonathan Gratch,et al.  Associations Between Interactants Personality Traits and Their Feelings of Rapport in Interactions With Virtual Humans , 2009 .

[54]  Timothy W. Bickmore.  Ethical Issues in Using Relational Agents for Older Adults , 2005, AAAI Fall Symposium: Caring Machines.