TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
HumanComputer
Etiqette
Compiled by
Mart Murdvee
Why should etiquette be meaningful in
interactions with computers?
Computers do
not have
feelings and do
not “feel” their
impact on
others.
Users of computers have
feelings, and etiquette,
even coming from a
computer, impacts how
users trust, accept, and
interact with even a
mechanical device.
Etiquette is not only
relevant for
understanding
interactions between
people and computers,
it is essential if we are to
design computer
assistants that can work
effectively and
productively with
people.
Regardless of whether
computers are designed
to exhibit etiquette,
human users may
interpret their behavior
as polite or rude.
Human–computer etiquette
a set of conventions that facilitate smooth and
effective interactions between people and
computers.
• For computers to be successful in etiquette, they must
produce nuanced responses that are sensitive to the
context and reactions of people.
• The reasons that computers need to be appropriately
polite are very pragmatic; like people, computer
agents need to exhibit appropriate etiquette if they are
to be accepted as part of a working team, gain trust
from their human collaborators, and enhance rather
than disrupt work and productivity.
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
1
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Etiqette
• the rules indicating the proper
and polite way to behave
• the conduct or procedure
required by good breeding or
prescribed by authority to be
observed in social or official
life
• Conventional rules of
personal behaviour in polite
society
(Concise Oxford Dictionary)
5
Etiquette
is typically thought of as a set of
socially understood conventions that
facilitate smooth and effective
interactions between people.
• Interactions may involve spoken,
written, or nonverbal communications.
• Conventions include far more than
words; meaning comes from a
combination of many channels such as
tone or voice, facial expressions, body
language, and actions such as holding
a door or offering the correct tool
before it is requested.
Hayes, Miller, 2011
6
Etiquette and Manners
• Etiquette is a code of behavior that influences expectations for social
behavior according to contemporary conventional norms within a society,
social class, or group.
• Rules of etiquette are usually unwritten, but aspects of etiquette have
been codified from time to time. Rules of etiquette encompass most
aspects of social interaction in any society, though the term itself is not
commonly used.
• A rule of etiquette may reflect an underlying ethical code, or it may reflect
a person's fashion or status.
• Manners involve a wide range of social interactions within cultural norms
as in the "comedy of manners", or a painter's characteristic "manner".
• Etiquette' and manners, like mythology, have buried histories especially
when they seem to have little obvious purpose, and their justifications as
logical ("respect shown to others" etc.) may be equally revealing to the
social historian.
• Etiquette is a set of rules dealing with exterior form. Manners are an
expression of inner character. Rules of etiquette are the guiding
codes that enable us to practice manners.
7
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
2
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Etiquette
Etiquette is not always about being pleasant, it is about
BEING APPROPRIATE — behaving in a way that others will
understand and perceive to be correct in context.
• Insufficient politeness or inappropriate interruptions are
viewed as rude.
• However, being overly polite may be viewed as obsequious
(or arrogant-heartless) and therefore irritating, and failing to
interrupt in an emergency (‘Fire!”) can be downright
dangerous.
• Etiquette can be used to help one to be seen as “nice” or
“polite,” but it may also be used to communicate emotions
that are less pleasant such as dissatisfaction, uncertainty,
urgency, and prohibition.
8
Etiquette for a domain defines
acceptable behaviors for that domain
Range of Possible Behaviors in Domain X
Unacceptable
Behaviors for
Domain X
Acceptable
Behaviors for
Domain X
Politeness
Etiquette for Domain X
Essentially, an etiquette for a specific domain is formed by
prescribing some subset of the range of possible human behaviors
as appropriate or inappropriate, expected or unexpected for those
who participate in that domain.
These behaviors may pertain to speech, dress, movement, etc., or to more
specific protocol behaviors
9
Two of the major etiquette challenges:
1. many of the conventions of
etiquette are implicit, and
2. etiquette is highly dependant on
culture and context.
– Etiquette is more often implicitly and
unconsciously understood and applied.
– People learn etiquette conventions over a
lifetime, often without consciously realizing
they are learning specific social interactions.
– Etiquette goes far beyond these explicit sets
of rules and protocols. This can make it
challenging for people attempting to learn
the conventions of other cultures…
10
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
3
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Etiquette – sociobiological approach:
expression of status and prescribed roles
• Status (hierarchies):
– Gender
– Age
– Position (authority), also formal
position
• Roles (expected behavior):
– The man as a woman's protector
and caretaker.
– Younger people caring for elderly
and all caring for children.
– Host - Guest (owning of territory)
11
Etiquette and conflict
Etiquette prevents open conflict,
which is resolved by the local
consent of the parties involved. If
etiquette and politeness is a form of
social interaction (rather than just
being nice), it seems to require:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Legitimacy baseline: That defines
the agreed rights of the parties in
the situation
Connected parties: That parties
are visible to and in communication
with each other
Available action choices: That the
action choices of the parties are
known and available to them
Delegation of rights: That parties
can formally or informally transfer
rights to other parties
Some basic rules of etiquette
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Be helpful
Be respectful
Be relevant
Be prompt
Be brief
Protect privacy
Be pleasant
Provide options
13
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
4
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Etiquette and Culture
• Etiquette is dependent on culture; what is
excellent etiquette in one society may shock
another. Etiquette evolves within culture.
• Etiquette can vary widely between different
cultures and nations.
14
Functioning of etiquette
Culture
Psycho-social
environment
Manners
Etiquette
Results
Behavior
Task
environment
15
The concept of culture and the
concept of man
Humans are, in sum, incomplete or
unfinished animals who complete or
finish ourselves through culture—and
not through culture in general but
through highly particular forms of it:
Dobuan and Javanese, Hopi and Italian,
upperclass and lower-class, academic
and commercial.
Man’s great capacity for learning, his
plasticity, has often been remarked, but
what is even more critical is his extreme
dependence upon a certain sort of
learning: the attainment of concepts, the
apprehension and application of specific
systems of symbolic meaning.
Geertz, 1973
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
5
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
“Control mechanism” view of culture
1. Culture is best seen not as complexes of concrete
behavior patterns — customs, usages, traditions,
habit clusters …, but as a set of control mechanisms
— plans, recipes, rules, instructions (what computer
engineers call “programs”) — for the governing of
behavior.
2. Man is precisely the animal most desperately
dependent upon such extra-genetic, outside-the-skin
control mechanisms, such cultural programs, for
ordering his behavior.
The Cultural Lens Theory
National culture provides a
functional blueprint for group
members behavior, social roles,
and cognitive processes.
• Members of national group growing up in
similar ecological and social context,
have shared experience.
• Similarities generate common behavioral,
social and cognitive patterns dimensions.
• The dimensions provide a lens through
which each member of a national group
„sees“ the world.
• The Lens filters and organizes incoming
information, focuses sensemaking,
structures planning and adaptation
activities, frames interaction and
communication.
• This provides common ground during
complex cognition in natural settings.
Computers and culture
Use of computing and technology in other
cultures: female member of Mursi tribe in
Ethiopia with assault rifle and iPod.
• When computers cross national
borders, systems designed to
support human–computer
interactions in one culture may
prove to be incompatible with
the representations, social
expectations, and cognition of
other cultures.
• Cultural incompatibility, often
invisible, may lead to error,
frustration, confusion, conflict,
and anger.
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
6
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Implications of cultural approach
As designers use their expertise in hardware and software to provide
intelligent functionality, they can easily and unconsciously assume their own
culture’s lens. Doing so may confuse or alienate potential users from other
cultures.
To avoid this “designer-centered design” error, they will have to make
accommodations for the culture-related behavioral, social, and cognitive
differences that influence human–computer interactions.
Designers must:
– first identify who their potential users are, what they need the system to do,
and how the system and users relate to each other.
– understand cultural differences in how activities are approached and how
people collaborate on tasks
– target domain and expectations about social context of work
– how tasks are divided, what information should be available to whom, and
what interactions are likely to be necessary or desirable to accomplish the
task
– categories expected, customary organization, relative importance of
achievement and relationships, and power distance.
Culture and body of information
oral
written
Jakob Hurt
(1839 – 1907)
computer, Internet
Human–computer etiquette
serves as a lens to view and
explain human reactions to
computers.
• It highlights and focuses us on
certain aspects of the computer, its
role, and the framework of cues and
interpretations in a culture, context,
or work setting that the computer
inevitably enters into.
Human–computer etiquette view
makes clear why software designers
can no longer afford to concentrate
only on “mechanical” algorithms
and logic, but must also consider
the social aspects of their software,
including whether it will be
perceived as kind, trustworthy, rude,
or clueless.
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
7
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Consequences of
anthropomorphization
The Speaktoit Assistant is a virtual buddy for
your smartphone that answers questions in
natural language, performs tasks, and notifies
you about important events. The Assistant
saves you time and makes communication with
gadgets and web services easier and less
stressful.
•
http://www.speaktoit.com/
•
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?i
d=com.speaktoit.assistant&hl=en
• When computers are given
human voices, faces, or forms,
people tend to apply the same
gender and race stereotypes to
the computer as they would to a
person of that gender or race
(Nass et al., 1997; Moreno et al.,
2002; Gong, 2008).
• People have socially-based
expectations of how computers
should behave, whether they are
conscious of these expectations
or not.
Media equation theory
= media equal real life
people’s interactions with televisions, computers and new media are
fundamentally social and natural (Reeves and Nass 1996).
• The human tendency to treat machines as more than machines is not
isolated to computers (in all their various forms, from laptops to robots);
people also form attachments and relationships with other types of
artifacts, and respond to them in ways that are essentially social.
• For example, many people talk to their cars, give them names, pat their
dashboards encouragingly, and curse at them when they fail.
• People may form human-like attachments to tools that are an essential
part of their work and creative processes.
Media equation studies
A. pick a social science finding (usually social psychology or
sociology) which concerns behaviour or attitudes towards
humans,
B. substitute ‘computer’ for ‘human’ in the statement of the theory
e.g., ‘people like people that flatter them’ becomes ‘people like
computers that flatter them’,
C. replicate the methodology of the social science study but
replace one or more humans with computers,
D. determine if the social rule still applies
Both - the general theory, that people tend to treat computers
as though they are real people and places, and specific media
equation findings have proven useful to designers.
(Johnson, Gardner, 2007)
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
8
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Explanations for the Media
Equation
• Anthropomorphism refers to people acting on a belief that
computers are essentially human, thus their behaviour when
responding socially to computers reflects ignorance, psychological
dysfunction, or social dysfunction.
• The ‘computer as a proxy’ argument is based on the notion that
when an individual responds socially to a computer they are, in
fact, responding to the machine as a human artifact. That is, the
machine is merely a medium that embodies the responses of the
producer or programmer.
• Mindlessness refers to the human tendency to act on ‘autopilot’,
that is, to react to certain cues that may lead to responses that are
not necessarily the most appropriate. According to the
mindlessness explanation, peoples’ social responses to
technology are not necessarily consistent with their beliefs about
the technology.
Moderating Variables for the Media
Equation Effect
• More experienced individuals were more likely to
exhibit a media equation response.
• People of high experience, but not low experience,
displayed a media equation pattern of results, reacting
to flattery from a computer in a manner congruent with
peoples’ reactions to flattery from other humans.
• It can be argued that people with more experience
using computers are more likely to mindlessly apply
‘human’ schemas and expectations to computers as a
result of the fact that computers often exhibit cues that
suggest ‘humanness’.
Computers Are Social Actors (CASA)
paradigm:
people respond to interactive
technology using the same rules
and heuristics that people use to
respond to other people.
•
•
•
Whether robots should be cast into social roles
such as teammates or not, both experimental
and field research demonstrate that people
automatically respond to robots as if they were
people.
The competitive vs. collaborative relationships
between humans and robots, influence
perceptions of robots.
Robot adaptability influences task
performance and social cohesion, and robotic
pets can be perceived as having social
rapport.
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
9
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Human-computer interaction and
human experience
• The field of HCI (human-computer interaction) has been
experiencing a paradigm shift from a cognitive approach, which
focuses on usability and learnability, to a holistic approach that
takes into consideration users’ experience, such as desires,
values, and feelings.
• The development of systems that convey emotional components
to improve user experience.
• User experience designers and HCI researchers argue that
systems built on models of cognition must also address affect to
bridge the gap between the user and system by placing the
domain of human experience at the center of interaction.
• Consequently, designing systems to respond to users’
emotions and studying affective consequences on users are
becoming valued experience-centered goals for the future of
HCI.
(Park et al, 2012)
Affective on-screen display
messages
•
•
•
•
(Park et al, 2012)
In the context of information retrieval systems,
providing affective cues, such as apologetic onscreen display (OSD) messages, appears to be a
way to influence users’ affective states as well as
their perceptions toward the system.
First of all, emotion plays a critical role in rational
aspects of attitude, behavior, and perception.
Apology is an attitude that can restore strained
relationships, prevent vengeful impulses, and create
possibilities for growth in trust.
Secondly, affective components, such as an
apologetic message upon the limitation of the system
performance, can help diminish the gap between the
user’s natural process of information use and the
one proposed by the information system.
One of their apparent goals of using apologetic
expressions is to promote politeness and increase
the perceived reliability.
Affective states studied
• Trust - the experience of trust is the outcome of the interaction of
people’s attitudes, values, moods, and emotions toward the system.
Therefore, maintaining the high level of trust can be crucial in HCI and
user experience design practice. Apologies can affect trust in a positive
way when used authentically and context-specifically.
• Frustration is recognized as a psychological state that is related to the
concept of goal attainment. Research on frustration indicated that users
wasted nearly one-half of the time spent on the computer due to
frustrating experiences. One of the major causes of user frustration is
errors. System errors can be especially frustrating to novice users, but
expert users may also have trouble responding to errors because error
messages tend to be inconsistent, unclear, and confusing.
• Apology is known to mitigate frustration. Studies suggested that
participants who were experiencing high levels of frustration would feel
greater relief immediately after displaying the affect-support interaction
via empathic and apologetic sentences, such as “We apologize to you for
this inconvenience,” or “I am sorry. It looks like things didn’t go very well”.
(Park et al, 2012)
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
10
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Experiment
The system used in this experiment was IPL2 (formerly the Internet Public Library;
http://www.ipl.org), a public digital library and learning and teaching environment.
Neutral message
Apologetic message
Non-apologetic message
The experiment consisted of three parts:
1.
participants completed pre-session survey regarding computer confidence and
anxiety;
2.
participants interacted with the system to complete a series of information retrieval
tasks, some of which led to the display of OSD messages;
3.
participants completed a postsession survey regarding their affective states (trust,
frustration) and perceptions of system attributes (aesthetics, usability).
(Park et al, 2012)
Results
Results indicated
that even simple
forms of affective
interaction can
influence users’
emotions and their
perceptions of the
system.
(Park et al, 2012)
Design implications
• A computer apology affects users in a similar way as human apologies do
by influencing their affective states and perceptions.
• The design of interactive system should take into consideration affective
aspects of interaction.
• Messages are invariably part of the system. Therefore, if OSD messages
must be shown, a sympathetic or empathetic message that sounds
wholehearted and sincere can influence users’ affective states and their
perceptions of system attributes, which in turn can help them carry out
tasks successfully.
• Designing an interactive system using affective wordings and cues can
be important. One of the difficult design challenges is crafting the
affective OSD messages because some users may take the
wholehearted apology as overblown or exaggerated.
• An OSD message should be authentic and non-exaggerated so that the
genuineness of the message can be delivered to the users effectively.
• It is important to provide a safe mental atmosphere by clearly recognizing
the situation, taking responsibility, and suggesting specific solutions for
restitution.
(Park et al, 2012)
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
11
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Additionally:
• Designers can improve awareness and readability
of the OSD messages by increasing the font size or
varying the color of the messages.
• Some of our participants did not read a message
the second time it is displayed, assuming it is the
same message as the previous one. When
designing affective OSD alerts with distinctive
messages, each message can start with
significantly different words or expressions so that
users can more easily distinguish among them.
(Park et al, 2012)
Polite web-based intelligent tutor
In the study presented in this paper, 132 high school students in a
classroom setting, grouped as low and high prior knowledge learners
according to a pre-intervention knowledge questionnaire, did not benefit
more from polite feedback and hints than direct feedback and hints on either
an immediate or delayed posttest, both of which contained near transfer and
conceptual test items. Of particular interest and contrary to an earlier lab
study, low prior knowledge students did not benefit more from using the
polite version of a tutor. On the other hand, a politeness effect was observed
for the students who made the most errors during the intervention, a
different proxy for low prior knowledge, hinting that even in a classroom
setting, politeness may be beneficial for more needy students.
(McLaren, DeLeeuw, Mayer, 2011)
Disagreeing Robot:
Social Aspects of Human-Agent Conflict
• Agents could potentially
generate interpretations of
situations and plans of
action that will not always
concur with human
operators’ tactics and
strategies but may
nonetheless be (even
more) effective.
• Experiment: collaborative
human-agent desert
survival task
(Takayama, Groom, Nass, 2009)
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
12
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
Negative politeness
is a redressive action addressed to the addressee’s
negative face: his want to have his freedom of action
unhindered and his attention unimpeded, protecting
someone else’s need for freedom and autonomy.
• Disagreement need not necessarily be negatively experienced if one
uses effective politeness strategies to negotiate a disagreement.
• These strategies include being conventionally indirect, not presuming or
assuming, not coercing, communicating a desire to avoid impinging, and
redressing other desires of the addressee.
• A general trend in these strategies is to be appropriately indirect and
distanced from the conflict, e.g., avoiding the use of “you” and “I”,
impersonalizing verbs, using passive and circumstantial voice, and using
point-of-view distancing.
(Takayama, Groom, Nass, 2009)
Results and implications
•
•
•
•
•
People do not simply respond to agents as sources of facts; agent
judgments and opinions are influential as well.
People are sensitive to being disagreed with and notice even small
disagreements. Thus, designers of language-based interactions
between humans and robots must be cautious when allowing the
agents to present judgments that might disagree with or contradict
the user. Furthermore, disagreement, even accidental
disagreement, can be viewed as criticism; criticism is one of the
most complicated realms of human behavior.
Disagreement can undermine feelings of similarity with agents.
Perceived similarity is one of the most powerful ways to increase
liking, perceived intelligence, feelings of a team, and other positive
outcomes.
As much as possible, the agent should wait to obtain the user’s
opinion before stating its own. Furthermore, the agent should err on
the side of agreement, concurring with the user when the
disagreement is uncertain.
When robots have to disagree with people, it may be beneficial to
displace the robot’s voice from its body in such a way that the
disagreement seems to come from a separate source other than the
robot’s body.
(Takayama, Groom, Nass, 2009)
Computational model of humancomputer etiquette
A theory of the role of politeness in human-human interactions, and a specific model of how to
construct utterances that will be regarded as more or less polite in context was previously
developed.
The model states that the amount of face threat (during social interactions the threat to the
speaker’s autonomy or the threat of not being highly regarded by others) in a communication
exchange is a function of the contextual values as follows:
W x = D(S,H) + P(H,S) + Rx
Where:
– W x is the ‘weightiness’ or severity of the threat
– D(S,H) is the social distance (roughly, the inverse of familiarity) between
Speaker (S) and Hearer (H)
– P(H,S) is the power difference that H has over S
– Rx is the ranked or raw imposition based on the content of the message to be
delivered.
The amount of threat must then be redressed, or mitigated by using
politeness strategies.
Wu et al () Utilizing Human Computer Etiquette to Encourage Human-Machine Therapeutic Alliance
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
13
TehnoPsychology
Human-Computer etiquette
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Takayama, Groom, Nass (2009) I’m Sorry, Dave: I’m Afraid I Won’t Do That: Social Aspects of
Human-Agent Conflict. CHI 2009, April 4–9, 2009, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Hayes, C. C., Miller, C. A. Eds. (2011) Human–Computer Etiquette: Cultural Expectations and the
Design Implications They Place on Computers and Technology. Auerbach Publications, Taylor &
Francis Group.
Clifford Nass, C., Yen, C. (2010) The Man Who Lied to His Laptop: What Machines Teach Us
About Human Relationships. Penguin Books Ltd.
Wu et al () Utilizing Human Computer Etiquette to Encourage Human-Machine Therapeutic
Alliance
Park et al (2012) Do You Care if a Computer Says Sorry? User Experience Design through
Affective Messages. DIS 2012, June 11-15, 2012, Newcastle, UK.
Klein, H.A. (2004) Cognition in Natural Settings: The Cultural Lens Model. In Kaplan, M. Ed.
Cultural Ergonomics. Advances in Human Performance and Cognitive Research. Vol. 4.
Johnson, D, M. and Gardner, J. (2007) The media equation and team formation: Further evidence
for experience as a moderator. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65(2):pp. 111124.
McLaren B.M., DeLeeuw, K. E., Mayer, R. E. (2011). Polite web-based intelligent tutors: Can they
improve learning in classrooms? Computers & Education 56, 574–584
© Compiled by M. Murdvee, 2013-14
14