Artificial intelligence and communication: A Human–Machine Communication research agenda

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) and people’s interactions with it—through virtual agents, socialbots, and language-generation software—do not fit neatly into paradigms of communication theory that have long focused on human–human communication. To address this disconnect between communication theory and emerging technology, this article provides a starting point for articulating the differences between communicative AI and previous technologies and introduces a theoretical basis for navigating these conditions in the form of scholarship within human–machine communication (HMC). Drawing on an HMC framework, we outline a research agenda built around three key aspects of communicative AI technologies: (1) the functional dimensions through which people make sense of these devices and applications as communicators, (2) the relational dynamics through which people associate with these technologies and, in turn, relate to themselves and others, and (3) the metaphysical implications called up by blurring ontological boundaries surrounding what constitutes human, machine, and communication.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence communication research human–computer interaction human–machine communication media studies ontological classification social configurations

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

(2003) Natural language processing. In: Ralston

Reilly

Hemmendinger

(eds) Encyclopedia of Computer Science. 4th ed. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 1218–1222.

Ananny

(2016) Toward an ethics of algorithms: convening, observation, probability, and timeliness. Science, Technology & Human Values 41(1): 93–117.

Broussard

(2018) Artificial Unintelligence: How Computers Misunderstand the World. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Calo

(2015) Robotics and the lessons of cyberlaw. California Law Review 103(3): 512–563. Available at: http://www.californialawreview.org/print/2robotics_cyberlaw/

Campolo

Sanfilippo

Whittaker

, et al. (2017) AI Now 2017 report. Report, AI Now, New York. Available at: https://ainowinstitute.org/reports.html (accessed 3 May 2019).

Carlson

(2015) The robotic reporter: automated journalism and the redefinition of labor, compositional forms, and journalistic authority. Digital Journalism 3(3): 416–431.

Clerwall

(2014) Enter the robot journalist: users’ perceptions of automated content. Journalism Practice 8(5): 519–531.

Craig

(1999) Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory 9(2): 119–161.

Dance

FEX

(1970) The “concept” of communication. Journal of Communication 20: 201–210.

10.

Dautenhahn

(2004) Socially intelligent agents in human primate culture. In: Payr

Trappl

(eds) Agent Culture: Human-Agent Interaction in a Multicultural World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 45–71.

11.

Dörr

(2016) Mapping the field of algorithmic journalism. Digital Journalism 4(6): 700–722.

12.

Edwards

(2018) Animals, humans, and machines: interactive implications of ontological classification. In: Guzman

(ed.) Human-Machine Communication: Rethinking Communication, Technology, and Ourselves. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 29–50.

13.

Edwards

Spence

, et al. (2016) Robots in the classroom: differences in students’ perceptions of credibility and learning between “teacher as robot” and “robot as teacher.” Computers in Human Behavior 65: 627–634.

14.

Evans

(2016) What Is a Human? What the Answers Mean for Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

15.

Eyssel

Hegel

(2012) (S)he’s got the look: gender stereotyping of robots. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 42: 2213–2230.

16.

Ferrara

Varol

Davis

, et al. (2016) The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM 59(7): 96–104.

17.

Fortunati

(2017) Robotization and the domestic sphere. New Media & Society 20(8): 1–18.

18.

Frankish

Ramsey

(eds) (2014) The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

19.

Gehl

Bakardjieva

(eds) (2017) Socialbots and Their Friends: Digital Media and the Automation of Sociality. New York: Routledge.

20.

Goffman

(1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books.

21.

Graefe

Haim

Haarmann

, et al. (2018) Readers’ perception of computer-generated news: credibility, expertise, and readability. Journalism 19(5): 595–610.

22.

Grudin

(2012) A moving target: the evolution of human-computer interaction. In: Jacko

(ed.) The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies, and Emerging Applications. 3rd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. xxvii–lxi.

23.

Gunkel

(2012a) Communication and artificial intelligence: opportunities and challenges for the 21st century. Communication+1 1(1): 1.

24.

Gunkel

(2012b) The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

25.

Gunkel

(2018) Ars ex machina: rethinking responsibility in the age of creative machines. In: Guzman

(ed.) Human-Machine Communication: Rethinking Communication, Technology, and Ourselves. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 221–236.

26.

Guzman

(In Review) Emotional Minds, Rational Tools: Ontological Differences Between People and Computers and the Implications for Human-Machine Communication.

27.

Guzman

(2017) Making AI safe for humans: a conversation with Siri. In: Gehl

Bakardjieva

(eds) Socialbots and Their Friends: Digital Media and the Automation of Sociality. New York: Routledge, pp. 69–82.

28.

Guzman

(2018) What is human-machine communication, anyway? In: Guzman

(ed.) Human-Machine Communication: Rethinking Communication, Technology, and Ourselves. New York: Peter Lang, pp. 1–28.

29.

Guzman

(2019) Voices in and of the machine: source orientation toward mobile virtual assistants. Computers in Human Behavior 90: 343–350.

30.

IEEE Standards Association (2019) The IEEE global initiative on ethics of autonomous and intelligent systems. Available at: https://standards.ieee.org/industry-connections/ec/autonomous-systems.html

31.

Innis

(2008) The Bias of Communication. 2nd ed. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

32.

Jones

(2014) People, things, memory and human-machine communication. International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics 10(3): 245–258.

33.

Jones

(2019) Untitled, No. 1. Human augmentics. In: Papacharissi

(ed.) A Networked Self and Human Augmentics, Artificial Intelligence, Sentience, vol. 5. New York: Routledge, pp. 201–205.

34.

Kelly

(1955) Psychology of Personal Constructs, vol. 1. New York: Norton.

35.

Lewis

Westlund

(2015) Actors, actants, audiences, and activities in cross-media news work: a matrix and a research agenda. Digital Journalism 3(1): 19–37.

36.

Lewis

Guzman

Schmidt

(2019) Automation, journalism, and Human–Machine Communication: rethinking roles and relationships of humans and machines in news. Digital Journalism. doi:10.1080/21670811.2019.1577147

37.

Lewis

Sanders

Carmody

(2019) Libel by algorithm? Automated journalism and the threat of legal liability. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 96(1): 60–81.

38.

Lievrouw

(2009) New media, mediation, and communication study. Information, Communication & Society 12(3): 303–325.

39.

McLuhan

(1994) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge: MIT Press.

40.

Marconi Siegman

and Machine Journalist (2017) The future of augmented journalism: a guide for newsrooms in the age of smart machines. Report, Associated Press, New York. Available at: https://insights.ap.org/uploads/images/the-future-of-augmented-journalism_ap-report.pdf (accessed 30 May 2019).

41.

Marvin

(1990) Reconsidering James Carey: how many rituals does it take to make an artifact? American Journalism 7(4): 216–226.

42.

Mead

(1967) Mind, Self, & Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist, vol. 1. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

43.

Montal

Reich

(2017) I, robot. You, journalist. Who is the author? Authorship, bylines and full disclosure in automated journalism. Digital Journalism 5(7): 829–849.

44.

Mou

(2017) The media inequality: comparing the initial human-human and human-AI social interactions. Computers in Human Behavior 72: 432–440.

45.

Nass

Brave

(2005) Wired for Speech: How Voice Activates and Advances The Human-Computer Relationship. Cambridge: MIT Press.

46.

Nass

Moon

(2000) Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues 56(1): 81–103. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00153

47.

Nass

Steuer

Tauber

(1994) Computers are social actors. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Boston, MA, 24–28 April, pp. 72–78. New York: ACM.

48.

Noble

(2018) Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: New York University Press.

49.

Oremus

(2015) Why robot? Automated journalism is no longer science fiction. It’s time to change what we call it. Slate, 5 February. Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/02/automated_insights_ap_earnings_reports_robot_journalists_a_misnomer.html (accessed 30 May 2019).

50.

Papacharissi

(ed.) (2019) A Networked Self and Human Augmentics, Artificial Intelligence, Sentience, vol. 5. New York: Routledge.

51.

Peter

Kühne

(2018) The new frontier in communication research: why we should study social robots. Media and Communication 6(3): 73–76.

52.

Peters

(1999) Speaking Into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

53.

Pew Research Center (2017) Nearly half of Americans use digital voice assistants, mostly on their smartphones. Report, Pew Research Center, Washington DC, 12 December. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/12/12/nearly-half-of-americans-use-digital-voice-assistants-mostly-on-their-smartphones/ (accessed 30 May 2019).

54.

Poster

(2016) The virtual receptionist with a human touch: opposing pressures of digital automation and outsourcing in interactive services. In: Crain

Poster

Cherry

(eds) Invisible Labor: Hidden Work in the Contemporary World. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, pp. 87–111.

55.

Primo

Zago

(2015) Who and what do journalism? An actor-network perspective. Digital Journalism 3(1): 38–52.

56.

Rainie

Anderson

(2017) The internet of things connectivity binge: what are the implications? Report, Pew Research Center, Washington DC, 6 June. Available at: https://www.pewinternet.org/2017/06/06/the-internet-of-things-connectivity-binge-what-are-the-implications/ (accessed 30 May 2019).

57.

Reeves

Nass

(1998) The Media Equation. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

58.

Reeves

(2016) Automatic for the people: the automation of communicative labor. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 13(2): 150–165.

59.

Riskin

(ed.) (2007) Genesis Redux: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Artificial Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

60.

Rogers

(1986) Communication Technology: The New Media in Society. New York: The Free Press.

61.

Rogers

(1997) A History of Communication Study: A Biographical Approach. New York: Free Press.

62.

Rosenthal-von der Pütten

Straßmann

Yaghoubzadeh

, et al. (2019) Dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior of virtual agents and its effects on evaluation and negotiation outcome in different age groups. Computers in Human Behavior 90: 397–409.

63.

Sandry

(2015) Robots and Communication. New York: Palgrave Pivot.

64.

Schramm

(1972) Nature of communication between humans. In: Schramm

(ed.) The Process and Effects of Mass Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, pp. 3–53.

65.

Schramm

(1988) The Story of Human Communication: Cave Painting to Microchip. New York: Harper & Row.

66.

Shechtman

Horowitz

(2003) Media inequality in conversation: how people behave differently when interacting with computers and people. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 5–10 April, pp. 281–288. New York: ACM.

67.

Smith

(2015) An NPR reporter raced a machine to write a news story. Who won? NPR, 20 May. Available at: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/05/20/406484294/an-npr-reporter-raced-a-machine-to-write-a-news-story-who-won (accessed 30 May 2019).

68.

Spence

(2019) Searching for questions, original thoughts, or advancing theory: human-machine communication. Computers in Human Behavior 90: 285–287.

69.

Statt

(2018) Google now says controversial AI voice calling system will identify itself to humans. The Verge, 10 May. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/10/17342414/google-duplex-ai-assistant-voice-calling-identify-itself-update (accessed 30 May 2019).

70.

Suchman

(2009) Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.

71.

Sundar

(2008) The MAIN model: a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In: Metzger

Flanagin

(eds) Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 73–100.

72.

Sundar

Nass

(2000) Source orientation in human-computer interaction: programmer, networker, or independent social actor? Communication Research 27(6): 683–703.

73.

Turkle

(1984) The Second Self. New York: Simon & Schuster.

74.

Waddell

Zhang

Sundar

(2016) Human–computer interaction. In: Roloff

Berger

(eds) The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication. 1st ed. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic0182

75.

Weil

(2017) The blurring test. In: Gehl

Bakardjieva

(eds) Socialbots and Their Friends: Digital Media and the Automation of Sociality. New York: Routledge, pp. 19–46.

76.

Weizenbaum

(1966) ELIZA —a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM 9(1): 36–45.

77.

Zhao

(2006) Humanoid social robots as a medium of communication. New Media & Society 8(3): 401–419.