The purpose of this research is to investigate how to mitigate user frustration and improve task performance in the context of human-computer interaction (HCI). Even though user frustration plays a role in many aspects of HCI and studies have looked into the consequences of frustration in various fields, the ways to mitigate frustration are less deeply examined. Once the system has the ability to understand and include user emotions as factors in HCI, the interaction between the user and the computer system could be adapted if the computers are able to modify its behavior with users in appropriate ways to further joint performance. Specifically, a preliminary study was conducted to explore the task performance, motivation, and confidence implications of changing the interaction between the human and the computer via different etiquette strategies. Participants solved a total of twenty mathematics problems under different frustration condition with feedback given in different styles of etiquette. Changing etiquette strategies in tutoring led to changes in performance, motivation, and confidence. The most effective etiquette strategies changed when users were frustrated. This work provides the foundation for the design of adaptive intelligent tutoring system based on etiquette strategies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BecharaA. (2004). The role of emotion in decision-making: evidence from neurological patients with orbitofrontal damage. Brain and cognition, 55(1), 30-40.
2.
BodenhausenG. V. (1993). Emotions, arousal, and stereotypic judgments: A heuristic model of affect and stereotyping.
3.
BroderickZ. (2011). Increasing parent engagement in student learning using an Intelligent Tutoring System with Automated Messages (Doctoral dissertation, Worcester Polytechnic Institute).
4.
DennerleinJ.BeckerT.JohnsonP.ReynoldsC.PicardR. W. (2003). Frustrating computer users increases exposure to physical factors. In Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Association, Seoul, Korea.
5.
DollardJ.MillerN. E.DoobL. W.MowrerO. H.SearsR. R. (1939). Frustration and aggression. Yale University Press, New Haven
6.
DorneichM. C.VerversP. M.MathanS.WhitlowS.HayesC. C. (2012). Considering etiquette in the design of an adaptive system. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 6(2), 243-265.
7.
EkmanP. (1970). Universal facial expressions of emotion. California Mental Health Research Digest, 8, 151-158.
FerdigR. E.MishraP. (2004). Emotional Responses to Computers: Experiences in Unfairness, Anger, and Spite1. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(2), 143.
10.
FisherC. D.NobleC. S. (2004). A within-person examination of correlates of performance and emotions while working. Human Performance, 17(2), 145-168.
11.
FoleyW. A. (1997). Anthropological linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
12.
GilbertS. B.BlessingS. B.GuoE. (2015). Authoring Effective Embedded Tutors: An Overview of the Extensible Problem Specific Tutor (xPST) System. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 1-27.
13.
GoffmanE. (1967). On face-work. Interaction ritual, 5-45.
14.
GraesserA. C.ChipmanP.HaynesB. C.OlneyA. (2005). AutoTutor: An intelligent tutoring system with mixed-initiative dialogue. Education, IEEE Transactions on, 48(4), 612-618.
15.
HayesC. C.MillerC. A. (2010). Should computers be polite? In HayesC. C.MillerC. A. (Eds.), Human-computer etiquette: Cultural expectations and the design implications they place on computers and technology (pp. 1–12). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis
16.
HoneK. (2006). Empathic agents to reduce user frustration: The effects of varying agent characteristics. Interacting with Computers, 18(2), 227-245.
17.
JeonM.WalkerB. N.YimJ. B. (2014). Effects of specific emotions on subjective judgment, driving performance, and perceived workload. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behavior, 24, 197-209.
18.
KasperG. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of pragmatics, 14(2), 193-218.
19.
KleinJ.MoonY.PicardR. W. (2002). This computer responds to user frustration: Theory, design, and results. Interacting with computers, 14(2), 119-140.
20.
KleinJ.MoonY.PicardR. W. (1999). This computer responds to user frustration. In CHI’99 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 242-243). ACM.
21.
KleinT.RosalindC.PicardW. (1999). Computer response to user frustration.
22.
KoedingerK. R.AndersonJ. R.HadleyW. H.MarkM. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city.
23.
KortB.ReillyR. (2002, January). An affective module for an intelligent tutoring system. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 955-962). SpringerBerlin Heidelberg.
24.
KortB.ReillyR.PicardR. W. (2001). An affective model of interplay between emotions and learning: Reengineering educational pedagogy-building a learning companion. In icalt (p. 0043). IEEE.
25.
LernerJ. S.LiY.ValdesoloP.KassamK. S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Psychology, 66.
26.
MillerC.A.DorneichM.C. (2006), From Associate Systems to Augmented Cognition: 25 Years of User Adaptation in High Criticality Systems, Proceedings of the Augmented Cognition International, San Francisco.
27.
MillerC. A.ParasuramanR. (2007). Designing for flexible interaction between humans and automation: Delegation interfaces for supervisory control. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(1), 57-75.
28.
MillerC. A.WuP.FunkH. B. (2008). A computational approach to etiquette: Operationalizing Brown and Levinson’s politeness model. Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 23(4), 28-35.
29.
MurrayT. (2003). An Overview of Intelligent Tutoring System Authoring Tools: Updated analysis of the state of the art. In Authoring tools for advanced technology learning environments (pp. 491-544). SpringerNetherlands.
30.
National Transportation Safety Board (1991). Aircraft Accident Report - Avianca, The Airline of Colombia Boeing 707-321 B (No. NTSB/AAR-9 l/04). Washington, D.C.
31.
ParasuramanR.MillerC. A. (2004). Trust and etiquette in high-criticality automated systems. Communications of the ACM, 47(4), 51-55.
32.
PearsonN. K.KreuzR. J.ZwaanR. A.GraesserA. C. (1995). Pragmatics and pedagogy: Conversational rules and politeness strategies may inhibit effective tutoring. Cognition and instruction, 13(2), 161-188.
33.
PicardR. W.KleinJ. (2002). Computers that recognize and respond to user emotion: theoretical and practical implications. Interacting with computers, 14(2), 141-169.
PicardR. W. (2006). Building an affective learning companion. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 811-811).
36.
PowersR.RauhC.HenningR.A.BuckR.W.WestT.V. (2011). The effect of video feedback delay on frustration and emotion communication accuracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1651-1657.
37.
SoloffN.ToddG. A.ScrevenC. G. (1964). Effects of frustration on perceptual-motor performance. Child Development, 569-575.
38.
SpectorP. E. (1975). Relationships of Organizational Frustration with Reported Behavioral Reactions of Employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(5), 635-637.
39.
TodaM. (1980). Emotion and decision making. Acta Psychologica, 45(1), 133-155.
WaterhouseI. K.ChildI. L. (1953). Frustration and the quality of performance. Journal of Personality, 21(3), 298-311.
40.
WahlströmJ.HagbergM.JohnsonP.SvenssonJ.RempelD. (2002). Influence of time pressure and verbal provocation on physiological and psychological reactions during work with a computer mouse. European journal of applied physiology, 87(3), 257-263.
41.
WengerE. (1987). Artificial Intelligence and Tutoring Systems. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann
42.
WoolfB.BurlesonW.ArroyoI.DragonT.CooperD.PicardR. (2009). Affect-aware tutors: recognizing and responding to student affect. International Journal of Learning Technology, 4(3-4), 129-164.
43.
WuP.MillerC. A.FunkH.VikiliV. (2010). Computational models of etiquette and Culture. Human-Computer Etiquette: Cultural Expectations and the Design Implications They Place on Computers and Technology, 63.
44.
YangE.DorneichM. C. (2015). The Effect of Time Delay on Emotion, Arousal, and Satisfaction in Human-Robot Interaction. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, October.
