Abstract
Computer based perspective taking tasks in cognitive psychology often utilise static images and auditory instructions to assess online communication. Results are then explained in terms of theory of mind (the ability to understand that other agents have different beliefs, desires and knowledge to oneself).The current study utilises a scenario in which participants were required to select objects in a grid after listening to instructions from an on-screen director. The director was positioned behind the grid from the participants’ view. As objects in some slots were concealed from the view of the director, participants needed to take the perspective of the director into account in order to respond accurately. Results showed that participants reliably made errors, attributable to not using the information from the director’s perspective efficiently, rather than not being able to take the director’s perspective. However, the fact that the director was represented by a static sprite meant that even for a laboratory based experiment, the level of realism was low. This could have affected the level of participant engagement with the director and the task. This study, a collaboration between computer science and psychology, advances the static sprite model by incorporating head movement into a more realistic on-screen director with the aim of a.) Improving engagement and b.) investigating whether gaze direction affects accuracy and response times of object selection. Results suggest that gaze direction can influence the speed of accurate object selection, but only slightly and in certain situations; specifically those complex enough to warrant the participant paying additional attention to gaze direction and those that highlight perspective differences between themselves and the director. This in turn suggests that engagement with a virtual agent could be improved by taking these factors into account.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Apperly, I.A., Carroll, D.J., Samson, D., Qureshi, A., Humphreys, G.W., Moffatt, G.: Why are there limits on theory of mind use? Evidence from adults’ ability to follow instructions from an ignorant speaker. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 63(6), 1201–1217 (2010)
Call, J., Tomasello, M.: Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? 30 years later. Trends in Cognitive Science 12(5), 187–192 (2008)
Carlson, S.M., Moses, L.J., Claxton, L.J.: Individual differences in executive functioning and theory of mind: An investigation of inhibitory control and planning ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 87, 299–319 (2004)
Clark, H.H., Marshall, C.R.: Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In: Joshi, A.K., Webber, B., Sag, I. (eds.) Elements of Discourse Understanding, pp. 10–63. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1981)
de Villiers, J.G., Pyers, J.E.: Complements to cognition: a longitudinal study of the relationship between complex syntax and false-belief- understanding. Cognitive Development 17, 1037–1060 (2002)
Hanna, J.E., Brennan, S.E.: Speakers’ eye gaze disambiguates referring expressions early during face-to-face conversation. Journal of Memory and Language 57, 596–615 (2007)
Keysar, B., Lin, S., Barr, D.J.: Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition 89, 25–41 (2003)
Onishi, K.H., Baillargeon, R.: Do 15-Month-Old Infants Understand False Beliefs? Science 308(5719), 255–258 (2005)
Peters, C., Qureshi, A.: A Head Movement Propensity Model for Animating Gaze Shifts and Blinks of Virtual Characters. Computers and Graphics, Special Issue on Graphics for Serious Games 34(6), 677–687 (2010)
Peters, C., Qureshi, A., Apperly, I.A.: Effects of gaze direction of a virtual agent in an online communication game. European Society of Philosophy and Psychology, Ruhr-Universität Bochum (August 2010)
Premack, D.G., Woodruff, G.: Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1, 515–526 (1978)
Qureshi, A., Apperly, I.A., Samson, D.: Executive function is necessary for perspective-selection, not Level-1 visual perspective-calculation: Evidence from a dual-task study of adults. Cognition 117, 230–236 (2010)
Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Oxford (1986)
Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Pragmatics, modularity and mindreading. Mind & Language. Special Issue on Pragmatics and Cognitive Science 17, 3–23 (2002)
Wellman, H.M., Cross, D., Watson, J.: Meta-analysis of theory-of-mind development: The truth about false belief. Child Development 72, 655–684 (2001)
Peters, C., Castellano, G., de Freitas, S.: An exploration of user engagement in HCI. In: Proceedings of the Affect-Aware Virtual Agents and Social Robots (AFFINE) Workshop, International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces and Workshop on Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction (ICMI-MLMI 2009), Boston, MA, USA, November 6 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Qureshi, A., Peters, C., Apperly, I. (2014). How Does Varying Gaze Direction Affect Interaction between a Virtual Agent and Participant in an On-Line Communication Scenario?. In: Shumaker, R., Lackey, S. (eds) Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments. VAMR 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8525. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07458-0_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07458-0_29
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07457-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07458-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)