ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2023
The promise and peril of interactive embodied agents for studying non-verbal communication: a machine learning perspective.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual agents as a scalable tool for diverse, robust gesture recognition.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Facial Regulation During Dyadic Interaction: Interpersonal Effects on Cooperation.Affective science · 2023Article
- Face2face: advancing the science of social interaction.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In face-to-face interactions, parties rapidly react and adapt to each other's words, movements and expressions. Any science of face-to-face interaction must develop approaches to hypothesize and rigorously test mechanisms that explain such interdependent behaviour. Yet conventional experimental designs often sacrifice interactivity to establish experimental control. Interactive virtual and robotic agents have been offered as a way to study true interactivity while enforcing a measure of experimental control by allowing participants to interact with realistic but carefully controlled partners. But as researchers increasingly turn to machine learning to add realism to such agents, they may unintentionally distort the very interactivity they seek to illuminate, particularly when investigating the role of non-verbal signals such as emotion or active-listening behaviours. Here I discuss some of the methodological challenges that may arise when machine learning is used to model the behaviour of interaction partners. By articulating and explicitly considering these commitments, researchers can transform 'unintentional distortions' into valuable methodological tools that yield new insights and better contextualize existing experimental findings that rely on learning technology. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Face2face: advancing the science of social interaction'.
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.