Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Lebogang Wame Molefi

dblp:199/2589 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Human-AI interaction · 62% Usability and user experience research · 19% Human-robot interaction · 19%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-AI interaction
conversational agents
0.412020
Empathy Is All You Need: How a Conversational Agent Should Respond to Verbal Abuse · CHI 2020
Human-robot interaction › affective interaction
empathy
0.112020
Empathy Is All You Need: How a Conversational Agent Should Respond to Verbal Abuse · CHI 2020
Usability and user experience research
user affect
0.112020
Empathy Is All You Need: How a Conversational Agent Should Respond to Verbal Abuse · CHI 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

between-subjects experiment · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Empathy Is All You Need: How a Conversational Agent Should Respond to Verbal Abuse
abstract
With the popularity of AI-infused systems, conversational agents (CAs) are becoming essential in diverse areas, offering new functionality and convenience, but simultaneously, suffering misuse and verbal abuse. We examine whether conversational agents' response styles under varying abuse types influence those emotions found to mitigate peoples' aggressive behaviors, involving three verbal abuse types (Insult, Threat, Swearing) and three response styles (Avoidance, Empathy, Counterattacking). Ninety-eight participants were assigned to one of the abuse type conditions, interacted with the three spoken (voice-based) CAs in turn, and reported their feelings about guiltiness, anger, and shame after each session. The results show that the agent's response style has a significant effect on user emotions. Participants were less angry and more guilty with the empathy agent than the other two agents. Furthermore, we investigated the current status of commercial CAs' responses to verbal abuse. Our study findings have direct implications for the design of conversational agents.
Hyojin Chin, Lebogang Wame Molefi, Mun Yong Yi
CHI2