ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2023
The Use of Voice Assistant for Psychological Assessment Elicits Empathy and Engagement While Maintaining Good Psychometric Properties.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Charting the evolution of artificial intelligence mental health chatbots from rule-based systems to large language models: a systematic review.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2025Article
- Internet-based self-administered intervention to reduce anxiety and depression symptomatology and improve well-being in 7 countries: protocol of a randomized control trial.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to use the Alexa vocal assistant as an administerer of psychometric tests, assessing the efficiency and validity of this measurement. A total of 300 participants were administered the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). After a week, the administration was repeated, but the participants were randomly divided into groups of 100 participants each. In the first, the test was administered by means of a paper version; in the second, the questionnaire was read to the participants in person, and the operator contemporaneously recorded the answers declared by the participants; in the third group, the questionnaire was directly administered by the Alexa voice device, after specific reprogramming. The third group was also administered, as a post-session survey, the Engagement and Perceptions of the Bot Scale (EPVS), a short version of the Communication Styles Inventory (CSI), the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSDS), and an additional six items to measure degrees of concentration, ease, and perceived pressure at the beginning and at the end of the administration. The results confirmed that the IRI did keep measurement invariance within the three conditions. The administration through vocal assistant showed an empathic activation effect significantly superior to the conditions of pencil-paper and operator-in-presence. The results indicated an engagement and positive evaluation of the interactive experience, with reported perceptions of closeness, warmth, competence, and human-likeness associated with higher values of empathetic activation and lower values of personal discomfort.
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.