Computers are Social Actors
Many of the current chatbot applications facilitate the easy integration of human and bot interaction. As discussed in the section on Live Training already, a bot may open the interaction by providing routine information such as legal disclaim-ers and by collecting initial information from the customer. Afterwards a human service provider takes over, answers all customer questions as necessary and of-fers additional services. The exit dialogue can be handled by the bot again. This may include billing or a customer satisfaction survey.
Current technology allows a conversational bot and a human to work in the same interaction space. It is possible to mix interactions completely and most importantly, it is possible for the human to have complete oversight. This repre-sents the complete merger of human services and artificial intelligence based on technology that has been available for decades. It also reduces the risk of using an AI system and increases human control and oversight.
Nass et al. (1994) introduced “Computers are Social Actors” as a new paradigm in human-computer interaction. The authors observed that an individuals interaction with computers are fundamentally social. This does not mean that users have a conscious belief that computers are human or human like, nor is it an indication of ignorance or cognitive dysfunction on the part of the user. Instead, social responses are so common that they are natural to humans and are applied to computers without reflection.
Nass et al. (1994) asked if users are applying politeness norms to computers or if they are using notions of self and others to machines. Furthermore, the authors asked if gender stereotypes are applied to computers or if there is a mistaken be-lief that the user is interacting with a programmer. More generally, the authors asked which social rules people apply to computers and how powerful these rules are. Is it easy to generate social responses or do they occur rarely? (Nass et al, 1994, p.72).
In five different experiments, Nass et al. (1994) found that social norms such as politeness are applied to computers. Furthermore, notions such as “self” and “others” are applied to machines as well. Voices, in particular, are social actors and notions of self and others are applied to voices as well. In addition, comput-ers can be gendered social actors and gender is an extremely powerful cue. Final-ly, users respond socially to the computer as such and the machine is not simply seen as a vehicle for social interaction with a programmer (Nass et al., 1994, p.77).
Generally, primitive social cues are powerful and social responses are both automatic and unconscious. Nass et al. (1994) imply that social psychology is relevant to human-computer interaction and that there are a number of design implications, e.g. social cues should not be heavy-handed and the choice of voices is highly consequential.
Clearly therapists and their clients are social actors, and if computers are easily accepted in social roles as well, then a conversational agent can join a team of psychologists and their clients (Diederich, 2021). Not surprisingly, the role of the conversational agent is to perform highly repetitive tasks, such as providing information and to explain assessment and therapy methods.
In one scenario, a clinical psychologist would see a client in fortnightly intervals to provide psychological therapy. A provisional psychologist who is still in training and works under supervision by the clinical psychologist would see the client more frequently to practice skills such as relaxation and mindfulness techniques. Both the clinical and provisional psychologist would frequently refer to the conversational agents for background information and simple question answering. At the centre, the client interacts with the artificial intelligence system very frequenting, with the provisional psychologist several times a week and with the clinical psychologist fortnightly.
Diederich J, The Psychology of Artificial Superintelligence. Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021, ISBN 978-3-030-71841-1, DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71842-8
Nass C, Steuer, J, Tauber ER, Computers are social actors. CHI’94, Human Factors in Computer Systems, 72-78, 1994.
Social
Computers are Social Actors
Many of the current chatbot applications facilitate the easy integration of human and bot interaction. As discussed in the section on Live Training already, a bot may open the interaction by providing routine information such as legal disclaim-ers and by collecting initial information from the customer. Afterwards a human service provider takes over, answers all customer questions as necessary and of-fers additional services. The exit dialogue can be handled by the bot again. This may include billing or a customer satisfaction survey.
Current technology allows a conversational bot and a human to work in the same interaction space. It is possible to mix interactions completely and most importantly, it is possible for the human to have complete oversight. This repre-sents the complete merger of human services and artificial intelligence based on technology that has been available for decades. It also reduces the risk of using an AI system and increases human control and oversight.
Nass et al. (1994) introduced “Computers are Social Actors” as a new paradigm in human-computer interaction. The authors observed that an individuals interaction with computers are fundamentally social. This does not mean that users have a conscious belief that computers are human or human like, nor is it an indication of ignorance or cognitive dysfunction on the part of the user. Instead, social responses are so common that they are natural to humans and are applied to computers without reflection.
Nass et al. (1994) asked if users are applying politeness norms to computers or if they are using notions of self and others to machines. Furthermore, the authors asked if gender stereotypes are applied to computers or if there is a mistaken be-lief that the user is interacting with a programmer. More generally, the authors asked which social rules people apply to computers and how powerful these rules are. Is it easy to generate social responses or do they occur rarely? (Nass et al, 1994, p.72).
In five different experiments, Nass et al. (1994) found that social norms such as politeness are applied to computers. Furthermore, notions such as “self” and “others” are applied to machines as well. Voices, in particular, are social actors and notions of self and others are applied to voices as well. In addition, comput-ers can be gendered social actors and gender is an extremely powerful cue. Final-ly, users respond socially to the computer as such and the machine is not simply seen as a vehicle for social interaction with a programmer (Nass et al., 1994, p.77).
Generally, primitive social cues are powerful and social responses are both automatic and unconscious. Nass et al. (1994) imply that social psychology is relevant to human-computer interaction and that there are a number of design implications, e.g. social cues should not be heavy-handed and the choice of voices is highly consequential.
Clearly therapists and their clients are social actors, and if computers are easily accepted in social roles as well, then a conversational agent can join a team of psychologists and their clients (Diederich, 2021). Not surprisingly, the role of the conversational agent is to perform highly repetitive tasks, such as providing information and to explain assessment and therapy methods.
In one scenario, a clinical psychologist would see a client in fortnightly intervals to provide psychological therapy. A provisional psychologist who is still in training and works under supervision by the clinical psychologist would see the client more frequently to practice skills such as relaxation and mindfulness techniques. Both the clinical and provisional psychologist would frequently refer to the conversational agents for background information and simple question answering. At the centre, the client interacts with the artificial intelligence system very frequenting, with the provisional psychologist several times a week and with the clinical psychologist fortnightly.
Diederich J, The Psychology of Artificial Superintelligence. Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021, ISBN 978-3-030-71841-1, DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71842-8
Nass C, Steuer, J, Tauber ER, Computers are social actors. CHI’94, Human Factors in Computer Systems, 72-78, 1994.