arXiv subjects

Orla Cooney

Publications and source records attributed to Orla Cooney.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2024

Listening to the Voices: Describing Ethical Caveats of Conversational User Interfaces According to Experts and Frequent Users

Advances in natural language processing and understanding have led to a rapid growth in the popularity of conversational user interfaces (CUIs). While CUIs introduce novel benefits, they also yield risks that may exploit people's trust. Although research looking at unethical design deployed through graphical user interfaces (GUIs) established a thorough understanding of so-called dark patterns, there is a need to continue this discourse within the CUI community to understand potentially problematic interactions. Addressing this gap, we interviewed 27 participants from three cohorts: researchers, practitioners, and frequent users of CUIs. Applying thematic analysis, we construct five themes reflecting each cohort's insights about ethical design challenges and introduce the CUI Expectation Cycle, bridging system capabilities and user expectations while considering each theme's ethical caveats. This research aims to inform future development of CUIs to consider ethical constraints while adopting a human-centred approach.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2021

Alexa, Play Fetch! A Review of Alexa Skills for Pets

Alexa Skills are used for a variety of daily routines and purposes, but little research has focused on a key part of many people's daily lives: their pets. We present a systematic review categorizing the purposes of 88 Alexa Skills aimed at pets and pet owners and introduce a veterinary perspective to assess their benefits and risks. We present 8 themes of the purposes for Skills aimed at pets and their owners: Calming, Animal Audience, Smart Device, Tracking, Training and Health, Translator, Entertainment/Trivia, and Other - Human Audience. Broadly, we find that these purposes mirror the purposes people have for using Alexa overall, and they largely are supported by veterinary evidence, though caution must be used when Skills relate to animal health. More collaboration between Conversational Agent researchers and animal scientists is called for to better understand the efficacy of using Alexa with pets.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2020

See what I'm saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers

Limited linguistic coverage for Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) means that many interact in a non-native language. Yet we know little about how IPAs currently support or hinder these users. Through native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers interacting with Google Assistant on a smartphone and smart speaker, we aim to understand this more deeply. Interviews revealed that L2 speakers prioritised utterance planning around perceived linguistic limitations, as opposed to L1 speakers prioritising succinctness because of system limitations. L2 speakers see IPAs as insensitive to linguistic needs resulting in failed interaction. L2 speakers clearly preferred using smartphones, as visual feedback supported diagnoses of communication breakdowns whilst allowing time to process query results. Conversely, L1 speakers preferred smart speakers, with audio feedback being seen as sufficient. We discuss the need to tailor the IPA experience for L2 users, emphasising visual feedback whilst reducing the burden of language production.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2020

Mental Workload and Language Production in Non-Native Speaker IPA Interaction

Through proliferation on smartphones and smart speakers, intelligent personal assistants (IPAs) have made speech a common interaction modality. Yet, due to linguistic coverage and varying levels of functionality, many speakers engage with IPAs using a non-native language. This may impact the mental workload and pattern of language production displayed by non-native speakers. We present a mixed-design experiment, wherein native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers completed tasks with IPAs through smartphones and smart speakers. We found significantly higher mental workload for L2 speakers during IPA interactions. Contrary to our hypotheses, we found no significant differences between L1 and L2 speakers in terms of number of turns, lexical complexity, diversity, or lexical adaptation when encountering errors. These findings are discussed in relation to language production and processing load increases for L2 speakers in IPA interaction.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2019

What Makes a Good Conversation? Challenges in Designing Truly Conversational Agents

Conversational agents promise conversational interaction but fail to deliver. Efforts often emulate functional rules from human speech, without considering key characteristics that conversation must encapsulate. Given its potential in supporting long-term human-agent relationships, it is paramount that HCI focuses efforts on delivering this promise. We aim to understand what people value in conversation and how this should manifest in agents. Findings from a series of semi-structured interviews show people make a clear dichotomy between social and functional roles of conversation, emphasising the long-term dynamics of bond and trust along with the importance of context and relationship stage in the types of conversations they have. People fundamentally questioned the need for bond and common ground in agent communication, shifting to more utilitarian definitions of conversational qualities. Drawing on these findings we discuss key challenges for conversational agent design, most notably the need to redefine the design parameters for conversational agent interaction.

cs.HC↗