Skip to Content
Last modified by Demi Breen on 2023/04/09 14:59
From version 2.1
edited by Liza Wensink
on 2023/03/19 21:31
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 3.1
edited by Liza Wensink
on 2023/03/19 21:43
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -23,6 +23,20 @@
23 23  
24 24  - When input from the user does not match any statement on the stored conversation path, the conversation path is branched and the success probability scores are updated depending on persuasion success/failure. (Once again, maybe not something we will be able to implement but can try to somehow mimic the idea of).
25 25  
26 -The article does, however, continue by mentioning that the Wizard approach where the robot is simply controlled by a human in a wizard-like fashion managed to persuade 25/60 users and the conversation agent based on the model only managed 1 out of 10 users. It is necessary to remember that designing a persuasive conversational agent consists out of two important aspects - having the robot follow genera human conversational rules, but also applying persuasiveness tactics. I will attempt to clarify these tactics a bit below.
26 +The article does, however, continue by mentioning that the Wizard approach where the robot is simply controlled by a human in a wizard-like fashion managed to persuade 25/60 users and the conversation agent based on the model only managed 1 out of 10 users. It is necessary to remember that designing a persuasive conversational agent consists out of two important aspects - having the robot follow general human conversational rules, but also applying persuasiveness tactics. I will attempt to clarify these tactics a bit below.
27 27  
28 +**The persuasiveness example given in this study entails:**
29 +
30 +"We first show two digital cameras to a customer A and B as shown in Table 1. Camera A has better features about the number of pixels and image stabilizer than camera B, but the price and the weight of A are more than those of B. The purpose of this persuasion is to make the user change his/her choice from the initial one to another one."
31 +
32 +The way the persuasion was designed in this case is according to the following:
33 +"Each phase has a goal to achieve such as “Ask which camera he/she prefers?” Hence the process of persuasive conversation can be represented as a sequence of phases. The sequence of phases may change depending on the responses from the user. If the user likes a camera because of the number of pixels, the agent tries to explain that the number of pixels is not important to choose a camera. If the user likes a camera because of its image stabilizer, the agent tries to explain that the image stabilizer is useless if photos are taken only in the day time."
34 +
35 +[[image:attach:flowchart.PNG]]
36 +
37 +From this particular case it is clear that the persuasive strategy is based on the fact that there is a set of expected things the user might bring up (like, a priori assumed aspects that the user might talk about) that the robot will attempt to explain away, or explain why the user does not need to bother about that when choosing the camera. In our case maybe we could also attempt to catch some reasons somebody might not want to go walking for example, and then try to explain away those reasons (once again, just an idea) to try to persuade the user to actually go out on the walk.
38 +
39 +**General persuasion tactics in conversation: **
40 +
41 +
28 28  
flowchart.PNG
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +XWiki.lwensink
Size
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +63.3 KB
Content