A Taxonomy of Social Cues for Conversational Agents

When using the taxonomy, please cite as Feine, J., Gnewuch U., Morana S. and Maedche A. (2019): “A Taxonomy of Social Cues for Conversational Agents” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. To read the paper, please click here.

Social cue: Pitch range
Communication system: Auditory
Cue category: Voice Qualities
Cue Description
The degree of variation from the CA’s average pitch.
Cue example
Small pitch range is a very monotone voice, whereas a high pitch range voice sounds really animate.
Cue impact
Higher pitched voice has impact on perceived personality type (Lee, Nass 2003), a variation of the pitch height to specific situations can indicate and complement agent emotions (Becker et al. 2004; Bickmore et al. 2010), certain pitch level have impact on perceived attractiveness of voice (Yuksel et al. 2016) and on the credibility (Cowell, Stanney 2005). Intonation are further a part of social dialog (Bickmore, Cassel 2001).
Reference List
1. Bickmore, T. W., Fernando, R., Ring, L., & Schulman, D. (2010). Empathic Touch by Relational Agents. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AFFECTIVE COMPUTING (1:1), pp. 60–71.
2. Cowell, A. J., & Stanney, K. M. (2005). Manipulation of non-verbal interaction style and demographic embodiment to increase anthropomorphic computer character credibility. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HUMAN-COMPUTER STUDIES (62:2), pp. 281-306.
3. Lee, K. M., & Nass, C. (2003). Designing Social Presence of Social Actors in Human Computer Interaction. In : CHI ’03, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 289-296). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
4. Bickmore, T., & Cassell, J. (2001). Relational agents: A Model and Implementation of Building User Trust. In J. Jacko (Ed.), Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 396-403). New York, NY: ACM.
5. Yuksel, B. F., Collisson, P., & Czerwinski, M. (2017). Brains or Beauty: How to Engender Trust in User-Agent Interactions. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. (17:1), pp. 2:1-2:20, from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2998572.
6. Bickmore, T. and J. Cassell (2005). Social Dialogue with Embodied Conversational Agents. In J. C. J. Kuppevelt, N. O. Bernsen and L. Dybkjær (eds.) Advances in Natural Multimodal Dialogue Systems, pp. 23?54. Dordrecht: Springer.
7. Cassell, J. (2001). Embodied Conversational Agents. Representation and Intelligence in User Interfaces AI MAGAZINE 22 (4), 67?83.
8. Bevacqua, E., S. Pammi, S. J. Hyniewska, M. Schröder and C. Pelachaud (2010). Multimodal Backchannels for Embodied Conversational Agents. In: Intelligent Virtual Agents. Ed. by J. Allbeck, N. Badler, T. Bickmore, C. Pelachaud, A. Safonova. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 194?200.