Abstract
The construction of embodied conversational agents is an ambitious, complex, and essentially interdisciplinary process. This is inevitable given the depth, sophistication, and many modalities of the products we seek to create. Other chapters in this book address methods for evaluating ECAs as artefacts or according to their usability. In this chapter, we offer a complementary perspective: grounding the evaluation of ECAs in the context of the different disciplines that have merged to create the research community constructing them.
Different research areas have different goals and criteria for success, and without understanding what these are and how they relate, we cannot intelligently recognise what contributions other groups are making, a necessary requirement for integrating work done on one aspect of ECAs with work on another. Our goal is to help our community ultimately to create the high-quality interdisciplinary products necessary for this discipline to mature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Andre, E., editor (1997). Notes of the IJCAI-97 Symposium on Animated Interface Agents: Making Them Intelligent, Nagoya, Japan.
Badler, N. (1997). Real-time virtual humans. In Pacific Graphics, pages 4–14, Seoul, Korea.
Badler, N., Allbeck, J., Zhao, L., and Byun, M. (2002). Representing and parameterizing agent behaviors. In Proceedings of Computer Animation, pages 133–143, Geneva, Switzerland. IEEE Computer Society.
Bates, J. (1992). The nature of characters in interactive worlds and the Oz project. Technical Report CMU-CS-92-200, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Bates, J., Loyall, A. B., and Reilly, W. S. (1992). An architecture for action, emotion, and social behavior. Technical Report CMU-CS-92-142, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.
Bickmore, T. (2003). Relational Agents: Effecting Change Through Human-Computer Relationships. PhD thesis, Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Blumberg, B. (1996). Old Tricks, New Dogs: Ethology and Interactive Characters. PhD thesis, Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Cahn, J. (1990). The generation of affect in synthesized speech. Journal of the American Voice I/O Society, 8:1–19.
Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Vilhjalmsson, H., and Yan, H. (2000). More than just a pretty face: Affordances of embodiment. In Proceedings of Intelligent User Interfaces 2000, pages 52–59, New Orleans, LA.
Doyle, P. (2003). Annotated Worlds for Animate Characters. PhD thesis, Stanford University. Forthcoming.
Ekman, P. and Friesen, W. (1976). Measuring facial movement. Journal of Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 1(1):56–75.
Elliott, C. (1992). The A ective Reasoner: A Process Model of Emotions in a Multi-Agent System. PhD thesis, The Institute for the Learning Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Elliott, C., Rickel, J., and Lester, J. (1999). Lifelike pedagogical agents and affective computing: An exploratory synthesis. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1600:195–212.
Fiske, S. and Taylor, S. (1991). Social Cognition. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Foner, L. (1993). What’s an agent, anyway? A sociological case study. Agents Memo 93–01, Media Laboratory, Massachusetts Instutite of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Franklin, S. and Graesser, A. (1997). Is it an agent, or just a program: a taxonomy for autonomous agents. In Müller, J., Woolridge, M., and Jennings, N., editors, Intelligent Agents III. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Goldberg, A. (1997). IMPROV: A system for real-time animation of behavior-based interactive synthetic actors. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1195:58–73.
Hayes-Roth, B., Brownston, L., Huard, R., van Gent, R., and Sincoff, E. (1994). Directed improvisation. Technical Report KSL-94-61, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.
Hayes-Roth, B. and Doyle, P. (1998). Animate characters. Autonomous agents and multi-agent systems 1:195–230.
Hayes-Roth, B., van Gent, R., and Huber, D. (1997). Acting in character. In Trappl, R. and Petta, P., editors, Creating Personalities for Synthetic Actors. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Isbister, K., Nakanishi, H., Ishida, T., and Nass, C. (2000). Helper agent: Designing an assistant for human-human interaction in a virtual meeting space. In Proceedings of CHI 2000, pages 57–64, The Hague, Netherlands.
Isbister, K. and Nass, C. (2000). Consistency of personality in interactive characters: Verbal cues, non-verbal cues, and user characteristics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(2):251–267.
Johnson, W. L. and Rickel, J. (1997). Integrating pedagogical capabilities in a virtual environment agent. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 30–38, Marina del Rey, CA.
Koller, D. (1996). Structured representations and intractability. ACM Computing Surveys 28(4es):8.
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Laban, R. (1974). Language of Movement: A Guidebook to Choreutics. Play, Inc., Boston, MA.
Lally, J. (2003). Giving life to Ratchet and Clank: Enabling complex character animations by streamlining processes. Gamasutra. Available online at http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20030211/lally_01.shtml.
Lasseter, J. (1987). Principles of traditional animation applied to 3D animation. Computer Graphics 21(4):35–43.
Laurel, B. (1990). The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Lester, J., Converse, S., Kahler, S., Barlow, T., Stone, B., and Bhogal, R. (1997). The persona e ect: Affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. In Proceedings of CHI’ 97, pages 359–366, Atlanta, GA.
Loyall, A. B. (1997). Believable Agents: Building Interactive Personalities. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.
Loyall, B. and Bates, J. (1991). A reactive, adaptive architecture for agents. Technical Report CMU-CS-91-147, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.
Murray, J. B. (1990). Review of research on the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70:1187–1202.
Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B., and Dryer, C. (1995). Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43:223–239.
Nass, C. and Reeves, B. (1996). The Media Equation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Nass, C., Steuer, J., and Tauber, E. (1994). Computers are social actors. In Proceeedings of CHI’ 94, pages 72–78, Boston, MA.
Nilsson, N. J. (1995). Eye on the prize. AI Magazine 16(2):9–17.
Ortony, A., Clore, G., and Collins, A. (1988). The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Perlin, K. and Goldberg, A. (1996). Improv: A system for scripting interactive actors in virtual worlds. Computer Graphics, 30:205–216.
Picard, R. W. (1997). A ective computing. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Poggi, I., Pelachaud, C., and de Rosis, F. (2000). Eye communication in a conversational 3D synthetic agent. AI Communications 13(3):169–182.
Reilly, W. S. N. (1996). Believable Social and Emotional Agents. PhD thesis, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.
Rist, T., Andre, E., and Müller, J. (1997). Adding animated presentation agents to the interface. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pages 21–28, Orlando, FL.
SIGGRAPH (2003). Android dreams: the present and future of autonomous robotics. In Programand Buyer’s Guide of SIGGRAPH 2003, p. 7, San Diego, CA.
Stone, B. and Lester, J. (1996). Dynamically sequencing an animated pedagogical agent. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 424–431, Portland, OR.
Thomas, F. and Johnson, O. (1981). The Illusion of Life: Disney Animation. Hyperion Books, New York.
Trappl, R. and Petta, P., editors (1996). Creating Personaities for Synthetic Actors. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Wallace, S. A. and Laird, J. E. (2003). Comparing agents and humans using behavioral bounding. In Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 831–836, Acapulco, Mexico.
Wiggins, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: the interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37:395–412.
Wooldridge, M. and Jennings, N. (1998). Pitfalls of agent-oriented development. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pages 385–391, Minneapolis, MN.
Zimbardo, P. and Leippe, M. (1991). The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Isbister, K., Doyle, P. (2004). The Blind Men and the Elephant Revisited. In: Ruttkay, Z., Pelachaud, C. (eds) From Brows to Trust. Human-Computer Interaction Series, vol 7. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2730-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2730-3_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-2729-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2730-7
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)