Jing Wei
Weiwei Jiang
Difeng Yu
Tilman Dingler
Vassilis Kostakos
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Smart speakers have become exceedingly popular and entered many people's homes due to their ability to engage users with natural conversations. Researchers have also looked into using smart speakers as an interface to collect self-reported health data through conversations. Responding to surveys prompted by smart speakers requires users to listen to questions and answer in voice without any visual stimuli. Compared to traditional web-based surveys, where users can see questions and answers visually, voice surveys may be more cognitively challenging. Therefore, to collect reliable survey data, it is important to understand what types of questions are suitable to be administered by smart speakers. We selected five common survey questionnaires and deployed them as voice surveys and web surveys in a within-subject study. Our 24 participants answered questions using voice and web questionnaires in one session. They then repeated the same study session after 1 week to provide a "retest'' response. Our results suggest that voice surveys have comparable reliability to web surveys. We find that, when using 5-point or 7-point scales, voice surveys take about twice as long as web surveys. Based on objective measurements, such as response agreement and test-retest reliability, and subjective evaluations of user experience, we recommend that researchers consider adopting the binary scale and 5-point numerical scales for voice surveys on smart speakers.
- [n.d.]. WaveNet: A generative model for raw audio. https://deepmind.com/blog/article/wavenet-generative-modelraw-audioGoogle Scholar
- Mike Allen. 2017. The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Duane F Alwin. 1992. Information transmission in the survey interview: Number of response categories and the reliability of attitude measurement. Sociological methodology (1992), 83--118.Google Scholar
- Scott Barge and Hunter Gehlbach. 2012. Using the theory of satisficing to evaluate the quality of survey data. Research in Higher Education 53, 2 (2012), 182--200.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Frank Bentley, Chris Luvogt, Max Silverman, Rushani Wirasinghe, Brooke White, and Danielle Lottridge. 2018. Understanding the long-term use of smart speaker assistants. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2, 3 (2018), 1--24.Google ScholarDigital Library
- John Brooke et al. 1996. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 189, 194 (1996), 4--7.Google Scholar
- S Tamer Cavusgil and Lisa A Elvey-Kirk. 1998. Mail survey response behavior: A conceptualization of motivating factors and an empirical study. European journal of marketing (1998).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Irene Celino and Gloria Re Calegari. 2020. Submitting surveys via a conversational interface: an evaluation of user acceptance and approach effectiveness. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 139 (2020), 102410.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Narae Cha, Auk Kim, Cheul Young Park, Soowon Kang, Mingyu Park, Jae-Gil Lee, Sangsu Lee, and Uichin Lee. 2020. Hello there! is now a good time to talk? Opportune moments for proactive interactions with smart speakers. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 3 (2020), 1--28.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dipanjan Chakraborty, Indrani Medhi, Edward Cutrell, and William Thies. 2013. Man versus machine: evaluating IVR versus a live operator for phone surveys in India. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Symposium on Computing for Development. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--9.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ti-Chung Cheng, Tiffany Wenting Li, Yi-Hung Chou, Karrie Karahalios, and Hari Sundaram. 2021. " I can show what I really like." Eliciting Preferences via Quadratic Voting. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1--43.Google Scholar
- Jane Chung, Michael Bleich, David C Wheeler, Jodi M Winship, Brooke McDowell, David Baker, and Pamela Parsons. 2021. Attitudes and Perceptions Toward Voice-Operated Smart Speakers Among Low-Income Senior Housing Residents: Comparison of Pre-and Post-Installation Surveys. Gerontology and Geriatric Medicine 7 (2021), 23337214211005869.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard L Clayton and Debbie LS Winter. 1992. Speech data entry: results of a test of voice recognition for survey data collection. JOURNAL OF OFFICIAL STATISTICS-STOCKHOLM- 8 (1992), 377--377.Google Scholar
- John Dawes. 2008. Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International journal of market research 50, 1 (2008), 61--104.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Don C Des Jarlais, Denise Paone, Judith Milliken, Charles F Turner, Heather Miller, James Gribble, Qiuhu Shi, Holly Hagan, and Samuel R Friedman. 1999. Audio-computer interviewing to measure risk behaviour for HIV among injecting drug users: a quasi-randomised trial. The Lancet 353, 9165 (1999), 1657--1661.Google Scholar
- Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. 2018. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805 (2018).Google Scholar
- Ed Diener, Derrick Wirtz, Robert Biswas-Diener, William Tov, Chu Kim-Prieto, Dong-won Choi, and Shigehiro Oishi. 2009. New measures of well-being. In Assessing well-being. Springer, 247--266.Google Scholar
- Don A Dillman and Leah Melani Christian. 2005. Survey mode as a source of instability in responses across surveys. Field methods 17, 1 (2005), 30--52.Google Scholar
- Don A Dillman, Glenn Phelps, Robert Tortora, Karen Swift, Julie Kohrell, Jodi Berck, and Benjamin L Messer. 2009. Response rate and measurement differences in mixed-mode surveys using mail, telephone, interactive voice response (IVR) and the Internet. Social science research 38, 1 (2009), 1--18.Google Scholar
- Tilman Dingler, Dominika Kwasnicka, Jing Wei, Enying Gong, and Brian Oldenburg. 2021. The Use and Promise of Conversational Agents in Digital Health. Yearbook of Medical Informatics 30, 01 (2021), 191--199.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Radhika Garg and Subhasree Sengupta. 2020. He is just like me: a study of the long-term use of smart speakers by parents and children. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 1 (2020), 1--24.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Khalil G Ghanem, Heidi E Hutton, Jonathan M Zenilman, Rebecca Zimba, and Emily J Erbelding. 2005. Audio computer assisted self interview and face to face interview modes in assessing response bias among STD clinic patients. Sexually transmitted infections 81, 5 (2005), 421--425.Google Scholar
- Moshe M Givon and Zur Shapira. 1984. Response to rating scales: A theoretical model and its application to the number of categories problem. Journal of Marketing Research 21, 4 (1984), 410--419.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Katharina Graben, Bettina K Doering, Franziska Jeromin, and Antonia Barke. 2020. Problematic mobile phone use: Validity and reliability of the Problematic Use of Mobile Phone (PUMP) Scale in a German sample. Addictive behaviors reports 12 (2020), 100297.Google Scholar
- Danula Hettiachchi, Zhanna Sarsenbayeva, Fraser Allison, Niels van Berkel, Tilman Dingler, Gabriele Marini, Vassilis Kostakos, and Jorge Goncalves. 2020. "Hi! I Am the Crowd Tasker" Crowdsourcing through Digital Voice Assistants. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376320Google ScholarDigital Library
- Allyson L Holbrook, Melanie C Green, and Jon A Krosnick. 2003. Telephone versus face-to-face interviewing of national probability samples with long questionnaires: Comparisons of respondent satisficing and social desirability response bias. Public opinion quarterly 67, 1 (2003), 79--125.Google Scholar
- Azra Ismail and Neha Kumar. 2018. Engaging solidarity in data collection practices for community health. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (2018), 1--24.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jiepu Jiang, Wei Jeng, and Daqing He. 2013. How do users respond to voice input errors? Lexical and phonetic query reformulation in voice search. In Proceedings of the 36th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 143--152.Google Scholar
- Aman Khullar, Priyadarshi Hitesh, Shoaib Rahman, Deepak Kumar, Rachit Pandey, Praveen Kumar, Rajeshwari Tripathi, Prince Prince, Ankit Akash Jha, Himanshu Himanshu, et al. 2021. Costs and Benefits of Conducting Voice-based Surveys Versus Keypress-based Surveys on Interactive Voice Response Systems. In ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 288--298.Google Scholar
- Soomin Kim, Joonhwan Lee, and Gahgene Gweon. 2019. Comparing data from chatbot and web surveys: Effects of platform and conversational style on survey response quality. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bret Kinsella. 2019. Loup Ventures says 75% of U.S. households will have smart speakers by 2025, Google to surpass Amazon in market share. https://voicebot.ai/2019/06/18/loup-ventures-says-75-of-u-s-households-will-have-smartspeakers-by-2025-google-to-surpass-amazon-in-market-share/Google Scholar
- Rafal Kocielnik, Daniel Avrahami, Jennifer Marlow, Di Lu, and Gary Hsieh. 2018. Designing for workplace reflection: a chat and voice-based conversational agent. In Proceedings of the 2018 designing interactive systems conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 881--894.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Allison Koenecke, Andrew Nam, Emily Lake, Joe Nudell, Minnie Quartey, Zion Mengesha, Connor Toups, John R Rickford, Dan Jurafsky, and Sharad Goel. 2020. Racial disparities in automated speech recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, 14 (2020), 7684--7689.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jon A Krosnick. 1991. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Applied cognitive psychology 5, 3 (1991), 213--236.Google Scholar
- Jon A Krosnick. 2018. Questionnaire design. In The Palgrave handbook of survey research. Springer, 439--455.Google Scholar
- Jon A Krosnick and Matthew K Berent. 1993. Comparisons of party identification and policy preferences: The impact of survey question format. American Journal of Political Science (1993), 941--964.Google Scholar
- Jon A Krosnick, Sowmya Narayan, and Wendy R Smith. 1996. Satisficing in surveys: Initial evidence. New directions for evaluation 1996, 70 (1996), 29--44.Google Scholar
- J Richard Landis and Gary G Koch. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics (1977), 159--174.Google Scholar
- Kwan Min Lee and Jennifer Lai. 2005. Speech versus touch: A comparative study of the use of speech and DTMF keypad for navigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 19, 3 (2005), 343--360.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Adam Lerer, Molly Ward, and Saman Amarasinghe. 2010. Evaluation of IVR data collection UIs for untrained rural users. In Proceedings of the first ACM symposium on computing for development. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--8.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rensis Likert. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology (1932).Google Scholar
- Yuhan Luo, Bongshin Lee, and Eun Kyoung Choe. 2020. TandemTrack: Shaping Consistent Exercise Experience by Complementing a Mobile App with a Smart Speaker. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376616Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kelly L'Engle, Eunice Sefa, Edward Akolgo Adimazoya, Emmanuel Yartey, Rachel Lenzi, Cindy Tarpo, Nii Lante Heward-Mills, Katherine Lew, and Yvonne Ampeh. 2018. Survey research with a random digit dial national mobile phone sample in Ghana: methods and sample quality. PloS one 13, 1 (2018), e0190902.Google Scholar
- Raju Maharjan, Per Bækgaard, and Jakob E Bardram. 2019. " Hear me out" smart speaker based conversational agent to monitor symptoms in mental health. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2019 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 929--933.Google Scholar
- Raju Maharjan, Darius Adam Rohani, Per Bækgaard, Jakob Bardram, and Kevin Doherty. 2021. Can we talk? Design Implications for the Questionnaire-Driven Self-Report of Health and Wellbeing via Conversational Agent. In CUI 2021--3rd Conference on Conversational User Interfaces. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--11.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gloria Mark, Shamsi Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski, and Paul Johns. 2014. Capturing the mood: facebook and face-to-face encounters in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1082--1094.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gloria Mark, Shamsi Iqbal, Mary Czerwinski, and Paul Johns. 2015. Focused, aroused, but so distractible: Temporal perspectives on multitasking and communications. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 903--916.Google ScholarDigital Library
- David Markland and Vannessa Tobin. 2004. A modification to the behavioural regulation in exercise questionnaire to include an assessment of amotivation. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology 26, 2 (2004), 191--196.Google ScholarCross Ref
- John A McCarty and Larry J Shrum. 2000. The measurement of personal values in survey research: A test of alternative rating procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly 64, 3 (2000), 271--298.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lisa J Merlo, Amanda M Stone, and Alex Bibbey. 2013. Measuring problematic mobile phone use: development and preliminary psychometric properties of the PUMP scale. Journal of addiction 2013 (2013).Google Scholar
- Elizabeth T Miller, Dan J Neal, Lisa J Roberts, John S Boer, Sally O Cresskr, Jane Metrik, and G Alan Marlatt. 2009. Test-retest reliability of alcohol measures: is there a difference between internet-based assessment and traditional methods? (2009).Google Scholar
- Chelsea Myers, Anushay Furqan, Jessica Nebolsky, Karina Caro, and Jichen Zhu. 2018. Patterns for how users overcome obstacles in voice user interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--7.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Charles Egerton Osgood, George J Suci, and Percy H Tannenbaum. 1957. The measurement of meaning. Number 47. University of Illinois press.Google Scholar
- Debajyoti Pal, Chonlameth Arpnikanondt, Suree Funilkul, and Vijayakumar Varadarajan. 2019. User experience with smart voice assistants: the accent perspective. In 2019 10th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT). IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Josh Pasek and Jon A Krosnick. 2010. Optimizing survey questionnaire design in political science. In The Oxford handbook of American elections and political behavior. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Neil Patel, Sheetal Agarwal, Nitendra Rajput, Amit Nanavati, Paresh Dave, and Tapan S Parikh. 2009. A comparative study of speech and dialed input voice interfaces in rural India. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 51--54.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Theresa E Perlis, Don C Des Jarlais, Samuel R Friedman, Kamyar Arasteh, and Charles F Turner. 2004. Audiocomputerized self-interviewing versus face-to-face interviewing for research data collection at drug abuse treatment programs. Addiction 99, 7 (2004), 885--896.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin Porcheron, Joel E Fischer, Stuart Reeves, and Sarah Sharples. 2018. Voice interfaces in everyday life. In proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alisha Pradhan, Leah Findlater, and Amanda Lazar. 2019. " Phantom Friend" or" Just a Box with Information" Personification and Ontological Categorization of Smart Speaker-based Voice Assistants by Older Adults. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1--21.Google Scholar
- Aung Pyae and Tapani N Joelsson. 2018. Investigating the usability and user experiences of voice user interface: a case of Google home smart speaker. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 127--131.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ling Qiu, Bethany Kanski, Shawna Doerksen, Renate Winkels, Kathryn H Schmitz, and Saeed Abdullah. 2021. Nurse AMIE: Using Smart Speakers to Provide Supportive Care Intervention for Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--7.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Juan C Quiroz, Tristan Bongolan, and Kiran Ijaz. 2020. Alexa depression and anxiety self-tests: a preliminary analysis of user experience and trust. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 2020 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2020 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 494--496.Google Scholar
- Shan M Randhawa, Tallal Ahmad, Jay Chen, and Agha Ali Raza. 2021. Karamad: A Voice-based Crowdsourcing Platform for Underserved Populations. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--15.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Melanie Revilla, Mick P Couper, Oriol J Bosch, and Marc Asensio. 2020. Testing the use of voice input in a smartphone web survey. Social Science Computer Review 38, 2 (2020), 207--224.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jungwook Rhim, Minji Kwak, Yeaeun Gong, and Gahgene Gweon. 2022. Application of humanization to survey chatbots: Change in chatbot perception, interaction experience, and survey data quality. Computers in Human Behavior 126 (2022), 107034.Google ScholarDigital Library
- George Robinson and Clive Morley. 2006. Call centre management: responsibilities and performance. International Journal of Service Industry Management (2006).Google ScholarCross Ref
- John P Robinson, Phillip R Shaver, and Lawrence S Wrightsman. 1999. Measures of political attitudes. Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Steven J Rosenstone, John Mark Hansen, and Donald R Kinder. 1986. Measuring change in personal economic well-being. Public Opinion Quarterly 50, 2 (1986), 176--192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mariah L. Schrum, Michael Johnson, Muyleng Ghuy, and Matthew C. Gombolay. 2020. Four Years in Review: Statistical Practices of Likert Scales in Human-Robot Interaction Studies. In Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, United Kingdom) (HRI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 43--52. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371382.3380739Google ScholarDigital Library
- Norbert Schwarz, Fritz Strack, Hans-J Hippler, and George Bishop. 1991. The impact of administration mode on response effects in survey measurement. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5, 3 (1991), 193--212.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jahanzeb Sherwani, Nosheen Ali, Sarwat Mirza, Anjum Fatma, Yousuf Memon, Mehtab Karim, Rahul Tongia, and Roni Rosenfeld. 2007. Healthline: Speech-based access to health information by low-literate users. In 2007 International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development. IEEE, 1--9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eunjung Shin, Timothy P Johnson, and Kumar Rao. 2012. Survey mode effects on data quality: Comparison of web and mail modes in a US national panel survey. Social Science Computer Review 30, 2 (2012), 212--228.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alicia D Simmons and Lawrence D Bobo. 2015. Can non-full-probability internet surveys yield useful data? A comparison with full-probability face-to-face surveys in the domain of race and social inequality attitudes. Sociological Methodology 45, 1 (2015), 357--387.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ulla Sonn, Kristina Törnquist, and Elisabeth Svensson. 1999. The ADL taxonomy-from individual categorical data to ordinal categorical data. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 6, 1 (jan 1999), 11--20. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 110381299443807Google Scholar
- Venkat Srinivasan and Amiya K Basu. 1989. The metric quality of ordered categorical data. Marketing Science 8, 3 (1989), 205--230.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ayushi Srivastava, Shivani Kapania, Anupriya Tuli, and Pushpendra Singh. 2021. Actionable UI Design Guidelines for Smartphone Applications Inclusive of Low-Literate Users. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1--30.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeff Szymanski and William O'Donohue. 1995. Fear of spiders questionnaire. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry 26, 1 (1995), 31--34.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Roger Tourangeau and Kenneth A Rasinski. 1988. Cognitive processes underlying context effects in attitude measurement. Psychological bulletin 103, 3 (1988), 299.Google Scholar
- Priyamvada Tripathi and Winslow Burleson. 2012. Predicting creativity in the wild: Experience sample and sociometric modeling of teams. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1203--1212.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Charles F Turner, Leighton Ku, Susan M Rogers, Laura D Lindberg, Joseph H Pleck, and Freya L Sonenstein. 1998. Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: increased reporting with computer survey technology. Science 280, 5365 (1998), 867--873.Google Scholar
- Niels Van Berkel, Denzil Ferreira, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2017. The experience sampling method on mobile devices. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 6 (2017), 1--40.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Morgan Vigil-Hayes, Ann Futterman Collier, Shelby Hagemann, Giovanni Castillo, Keller Mikkelson, Joshua Dingman, Andrew Muñoz, Jade Luther, and Alexandra McLaughlin. 2021. Integrating cultural relevance into a behavioral mHealth intervention for Native American youth. Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1--29.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jinping Wang, Hyun Yang, Ruosi Shao, Saeed Abdullah, and S Shyam Sundar. 2020. Alexa as coach: Leveraging smart speakers to build social agents that reduce public speaking anxiety. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--13.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jing Wei, Tilman Dingler, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2021. Understanding User Perceptions of Proactive Smart Speakers. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 5, 4 (2021), 1--28.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jing Wei, Benjamin Tag, Johanne R Trippas, Tilman Dingler, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2022. What Could Possibly Go Wrong When Interacting with Proactive Smart Speakers? A Case Study Using an ESM Application. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--15.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Philip M Wilson, Wendy M Rodgers, and Shawn N Fraser. 2002. Examining the psychometric properties of the behavioral regulation in exercise questionnaire. Measurement in physical education and exercise science 6, 1 (2002), 1--21.Google Scholar
- PhilipMWilson,WendyMRodgers, Christina C Loitz, and Giulia Scime. 2006. ?It's Who I Am.. . Really!'The importance of integrated regulation in exercise contexts 1. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research 11, 2 (2006), 79--104.Google Scholar
- Ziang Xiao, Michelle X Zhou, Q Vera Liao, Gloria Mark, Changyan Chi, Wenxi Chen, and Huahai Yang. 2020. Tell me about yourself: Using an AI-powered chatbot to conduct conversational surveys with open-ended questions. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 27, 3 (2020), 1--37.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yukang Yan, Chun Yu, Wengrui Zheng, Ruining Tang, Xuhai Xu, and Yuanchun Shi. 2020. FrownOnError: Interrupting Responses from Smart Speakers by Facial Expressions. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cong Ye, Jenna Fulton, and Roger Tourangeau. 2011. More positive or more extreme? A meta-analysis of mode differences in response choice. Public Opinion Quarterly 75, 2 (2011), 349--365.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Understanding How to Administer Voice Surveys through Smart Speakers
Recommendations
Understanding User Perceptions of Proactive Smart Speakers
Voice assistants, such as Amazon's Alexa and Google Home, increasingly find their way into consumer homes. Their functionality, however, is currently limited to being passive answer machines rather than proactively engaging users in conversations. ...
Intelligibility Issues Faced by Smart Speaker Enthusiasts in Understanding What Their Devices Do and Why
OzCHI '20: Proceedings of the 32nd Australian Conference on Human-Computer InteractionStudies of smart speakers highlight issues people face with understanding why unexpected behaviour occurs and with recovering from mistakes due to uninformative responses. Yet, our understanding of such intelligibility issues in smart speakers — ...
Machine Body Language: Expressing a Smart Speaker’s Activity with Intelligible Physical Motion
DIS '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Designing Interactive Systems ConferencePeople’s physical movement and body language implicitly convey what they think and feel, are doing or are about to do. In contrast, current smart speakers miss out on this richness of body language, primarily relying on voice commands only. We present ...
Comments