Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26539138›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015

Comprehension and engagement in survey interviews with virtual agents.

Frederick G Conrad, Michael F Schober, Matt Jans, Rachel A Orlowski, Daniel Nielsen, Rachel Levenstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. The Effect of Rapport on Data Quality in Face-to-Face Interviews: Beneficial or Detrimental?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Engagement in Human-Agent Interaction: An Overview.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2020
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Frederick G ConradMichigan Program in Survey Methodology, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA ; Joint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland College Park, MD, USA.
Michael F SchoberDepartment of Psychology, New School for Social Research New York, NY, USA.
Matt JansCenter for Health Policy Research, University of California at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Rachel A OrlowskiDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Daniel NielsenDepartment of Biostatistics, Center for Cancer Biostatistics, University of Michigan Medical School Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Rachel LevensteinUniversity of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research, Urban Education Institute, University of Chicago Chicago, IL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

comprehensiondialog capabilityfacial animationsocial signalssurvey interviewingvirtual agent

Identifiers

PMID26539138
PMCPMC4611966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.