A study on human-agent teaming through spoken interaction: the impact of human individual traits and agent characteristics

Abstract

Human-agent teams are collaborative systems where humans and agents work interdependently to achieve shared goals. The success of such teams is associated with the human's perception of the agent as a legitimate teammate. This perception is thought to depend not only on the agent's capabilities and reliability but also on social factors. We explore whether simple changes in an agent's communicative behavior can influence the human's perception of the agent's teammate-likeness. To this end, we developed a protocol based on a collaborative game requiring spoken interaction, in which a human subject and a virtual agent collaborate to identify a target object and place it on a board. Each subject interacted with two agents which provided the same task-relevant information but differed in behavior. While one was a neutral tool-like agent, the other was a team-building agent that used simple social strategies such as empathy, politeness, and positivity. Our analysis shows that the team-building agent was perceived as significantly more teammate-like, even in terms of its ability, despite both agents having identical capabilities for game-solving. Further, subjects with a higher propensity to trust automated systems and lower neuroticism tended to have a more favorable perception of the agent. Finally, we found that subjects tended to change their prosodic patterns when talking to the team-building agent, as a classifier based on prosodic features was able to predict the type of agent with better-than-random performance. A practically relevant conclusion is that minimal changes in spoken communication behavior of the agent, easily implemented in a variety of scenarios, can have a significant positive impact on the human's perception of its teammate-likeness.