Using an Interactive Avatar's Facial Expressiveness to Increase Persuasiveness and Socialness

ABSTRACT

Research indicates that the facial expressions of animated characters and agents can influence people's perceptions and interactions with these entities. We designed an experiment to examine how an interactive animated avatar's facial expressiveness influences dyadic conversations between adults and the avatar. We animated the avatar in realtime using the tracked facial motion of a confederate. To adjust facial expressiveness, we damped and exaggerated the avatar's facial motion. We found that ratings of the avatar's extroversion were positively related to its expressiveness. However, impressions of the avatar's realism and naturalness worsened with increased expressiveness. We also found that the confederate was more influential when she appeared as the damped or exaggerated avatar. Adjusting the expressiveness of interactive animated avatars may be a simple way to influence people's social judgments and willingness to collaborate with animated avatars. These results have implications for using avatar facial expressiveness to improve the effectiveness of avatars in various contexts. Adjusting the expressiveness of interactive animated avatars may be a simple way to influence people's social judgments and willingness to collaborate with animated avatars.

References

1. Ackerman, S. J., and Hilsenroth, M. J. A review of therapist characteristics and techniques positively impacting the therapeutic alliance. Clin Psychol Rev 23, 1 (2003), 1--33.
2. Andrist, S., Mutlu, B., and Gleicher, M. Conversational gaze aversion for virtual agents. In Proc. IVA 2013, Springer (2013), 249--262.
3. Bailenson, J. N., Yee, N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A. C., Lundblad, N., and Jin, M. The use of immersive virtual reality in the learning sciences: Digital transformations of teachers, students, and social context. J Learn Sci 17, 1 (2008), 102--141.
4. Bates, J. The role of emotion in believable agents. Commun ACM 37, 7 (1994), 122--125.
5. Boker, S. M., Cohn, J. F., Theobald, B.-J., Matthews, I., Brick, T. R., and Spies, J. R. Effects of damping head movement and facial expression in dyadic conversation using real-time facial expression tracking and synthesized avatars. Phil Trans R Soc B 364, 1535 (2009), 3485--3495.
6. Burgoon, J. K., Birk, T., and Pfau, M. Nonverbal behaviors, persuasion, and credibility. Hum Commun Res 17, 1 (1990), 140--169.
7. Chaiken, S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. J Pers Soc Psychol 39, 5 (1980), 752.
8. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge, 1988.
9. Colvin, C. R., and Funder, D. C. Predicting personality and behavior: A boundary on the acquaintanceship effect. J Pers Soc Psychol 60, 6 (1991), 884--894.
10. Cootes, T. F., Edwards, G. J., and Taylor, C. J. Active appearance models. IEEE TPAMI 23, 6 (2001), 681--685.
11. Cootes, T. F., Wheeler, G. V., Walker, K. N., and Taylor, C. J. View-based active appearance models. Image Vision Comput 20, 9 (2002), 657--664.
12. Eagly, A. H., and Chaiken, S. The Psychology of Attitudes. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1993.
13. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., and Xu, J. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. J Pers Soc Psychol 82, 6 (2002), 878--902.
14. Fogg, B. J. Computers as persuasive social actors. In Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do, J. Grudin, J. Nielsen, and S. Card, Eds. Science & Technology Books, 2002, ch. 5, 89--120.
15. Gerber, A. S., Huber, G. A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C. M., and Panagopoulos, C. Big Five personality traits and responses to persuasive appeals: Results from voter turnout experiments. Polit Behav 35, 4 (2013), 687--728.
16. Gorla, N., and Lam, Y. W. Who should work with whom? Building effective software project teams. Commun ACM 47, 6 (2004), 79--82.
17. Gosling, S., Rentfrow, P., and Swann, W. A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. J Res Pers 37, 6 (2003), 504--528.
18. Ho, C.-C., and MacDorman, K. F. Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices. Comput Hum Behav 26, 6 (2010), 1508--1518.
19. Hodgkinson, G. The seduction of realism. In Proc. SIGGRAPH ASIA 2009 Educators Program, no. 4, ACM Press (2009), 1--4.
20. Hyde, J., Carter, E. J., Kiesler, S., and Hodgins, J. K. Perceptual effects of damped and exaggerated facial motion in animated characters. In Proc. FG 2013, IEEE Press (2013), 1--6.
21. Hyde, J., Carter, E. J., Kiesler, S., and Hodgins, J. K. Assessing naturalness and emotional intensity: A perceptual study of animated facial motion. In Proc. SAP 2014, ACM Press (2014), 15--22.
22. Hyde, J., Kiesler, S., Hodgins, J. K., and Carter, E. J. Conversing with children: Cartoon and video people elicit similar conversational behaviors. In Proc. CHI 2014, ACM Press (2014), 1787--1796.
23. Isbister, K., and Nass, C. Consistency of personality in interactive characters: verbal cues, non-verbal cues, and user characteristics. Int J Hum-Comput St 53, 2 (2000), 251--267.
24. Kandalaft, M. R., Didehbani, N., Krawczyk, D. C., Allen, T. T., and Chapman, S. B. Virtual reality social cognition training for young adults with high-functioning autism. J Autism Dev Disord 43, 1 (2013), 34--44.
25. Lafferty, J. C., and Eady, P. M. The Desert Survival Problem. Human Synergistics, Plymouth, Michigan, 1974.
26. Leary, T. Interpersonal Diagnosis of Personality. Ronald Press, 1957.
27. Letzring, T. D. The good judge of personality: Characteristics, behaviors, and observer accuracy. J Res Pers 42, 4 (2008), 914--932.
28. Matthews, I., and Baker, S. Active appearance models revisited. Int J Comput Vision 60, 2 (2004), 135--164.
29. McCrae, R. R., and Costa Jr, P. T. A Five-Factor theory of personality. In Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, L. A. Pervin and O. P. John, Eds., 2 ed. Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA, 1999, ch. 5, 139--153.
30. Moreno, R., and Flowerday, T. Students' choice of animated pedagogical agents in science learning: A test of the similarity-attraction hypothesis on gender and ethnicity. Contemp Educ Psychol 31, 2 (2006), 186--207.
31. Nass, C., and Lee, K. M. Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction. J Exp Psychol-Appl 7, 3 (2001), 171--181.
32. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B., Reeves, B., and Dryer, D. C. Can computer personalities be human personalities? Int J Hum-Comput St 43, 2 (1995), 223--239.
33. Oreg, S., and Sverdlik, N. Source personality and persuasiveness: Big Five predispositions to being persuasive and the role of message involvement. J Pers 82, 3 (2014), 250--264.
34. Petty, R. E., and Cacioppo, J. T. Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches. Brown, Dubuque, IA, 1981.
35. Rae, I., Takayama, L., and Mutlu, B. One of the gang: Supporting in-group behavior for embodied mediated communication. In Proc. CHI 2012, ACM Press (2012), 3091--3100.
36. Schroeders, U., and Wilhelm, O. Computer usage questionnaire: Structure, correlates, and gender differences. Comput Hum Behav 27, 2 (2011), 899--904.
37. Sullivan, H. S. The Interpersonal Theory of Psychiatry. WW Norton & Co, 1953.
38. Theobald, B.-J., Matthews, I., Mangini, M., Spies, J. R., Brick, T. R., Cohn, J. F., and Boker, S. M. Mapping and manipulating facial expression. Lang Speech 52, 2/3 (2009), 369--386.
39. Thomas, F., and Johnston, O. Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life. Abbeville Press New York, 1981.
40. Vugt, H. C. V., Bailenson, J. N., Hoorn, J. F., and Konijn, E. A. Effects of facial similarity on user responses to embodied agents. ACM TOCHI 17, 2 (2008), 7:1--7:27.
41. Young, S., and Shaw, D. G. Profiles of effective college and university teachers. J High Educ 70, 6 (1999), 670--686.

Index Terms

• Information systems

  • Information systems applications

    • Multimedia information systems