"What can i help you with?": infrequent users' experiences of intelligent personal assistants
By Benjamin R. Cowan, Nadia Pantidi, David Coyle, K. Morrissey, P. Clarke, Sara Al-Shehri, David Earley, Natasha Bandeira. International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 2017
388 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) are widely available on devices such as smartphones. However, most people do not use them regularly. Previous research has studied the experiences of frequent IPA users. Using qualitative methods we explore the experience of infrequent users: people who have tried IPAs, but choose not to use them regularly. Unsurprisingly infrequent users share some of the experiences of frequent users, e.g. frustration at limitations on fully hands-free interaction. Significant points of contrast and previously unidentified concerns also emerge. Cultural norms and social embarrassment take on added significance for infrequent users. Humanness of IPAs sparked comparisons with human assistants, juxtaposing their limitations. Most importantly, significant concerns emerged around privacy, monetization, data permanency and transparency. Drawing on these findings we discuss key challenges, including: designing for interruptability; reconsideration of the human metaphor; issues of trust and data ownership. Addressing these challenges may lead to more widespread IPA use.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Social Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/11c15a887ded1a0f982e36ed217ea3e599d4c90e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
Citations in the corpus
- What Makes a Good Conversation?: Challenges in Designing Truly Conversational Agents (2019, background): “hat conversational agents can and should be capable of performing. These expectations support the notion that an agent is a basic dialogue partner [8] lacking in humanlike conversational capabilities [20, 35, 42]. Our participants personally expressed no desire to build bonds with conversational age”
- Towards Ecologically Valid Research on Language User Interfaces (2020, neutral): “Such studies on LUIs are commonly found in the Human Computer Interaction (HCI) community, e.g. by conducting interviews with real-world users of commercial personal assistants (Luger and Sellen, 2016; Cowan et al., 2017).”