ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015
Comprehension and engagement in survey interviews with virtual agents.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The uncanny valley effect in embodied conversational agents: a critical systematic review of attractiveness, anthropomorphism, and uncanniness.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Self-Guided Web-Based Interventions: Scoping Review on User Needs and the Potential of Embodied Conversational Agents to Address Them.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Pooled it
- Talking surveys: How photorealistic embodied conversational agents shape response quality, engagement, and satisfaction.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- The Effect of Rapport on Data Quality in Face-to-Face Interviews: Beneficial or Detrimental?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Key changes to improve social presence of a virtual health assistant promoting colorectal cancer screening informed by a technology acceptance model.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2021Article
- Engagement in Human-Agent Interaction: An Overview.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2020Review
- Beyond Likeability: Investigating Social Interactions with Artificial Agents and Objective Metrics.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
- Mimicry and expressiveness of an ECA in human-agent interaction: familiarity breeds content!Computational cognitive science · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates how an onscreen virtual agent's dialog capability and facial animation affect survey respondents' comprehension and engagement in "face-to-face" interviews, using questions from US government surveys whose results have far-reaching impact on national policies. In the study, 73 laboratory participants were randomly assigned to respond in one of four interviewing conditions, in which the virtual agent had either high or low dialog capability (implemented through Wizard of Oz) and high or low facial animation, based on motion capture from a human interviewer. Respondents, whose faces were visible to the Wizard (and videorecorded) during the interviews, answered 12 questions about housing, employment, and purchases on the basis of fictional scenarios designed to allow measurement of comprehension accuracy, defined as the fit between responses and US government definitions. Respondents answered more accurately with the high-dialog-capability agents, requesting clarification more often particularly for ambiguous scenarios; and they generally treated the high-dialog-capability interviewers more socially, looking at the interviewer more and judging high-dialog-capability agents as more personal and less distant. Greater interviewer facial animation did not affect response accuracy, but it led to more displays of engagement-acknowledgments (verbal and visual) and smiles-and to the virtual interviewer's being rated as less natural. The pattern of results suggests that a virtual agent's dialog capability and facial animation differently affect survey respondents' experience of interviews, behavioral displays, and comprehension, and thus the accuracy of their responses. The pattern of results also suggests design considerations for building survey interviewing agents, which may differ depending on the kinds of survey questions (sensitive or not) that are asked.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.