journal article·2025-05-03Open access

Subjective Evaluation of Generative AI-Driven Dialogues in Paired Dyadic and Topic-Sharing Triadic Interaction Structures

Kaori Abe, Changqin Quan, Sheng Cao, Zhiwei Luo

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 9

Abstract

As the linguistic capabilities of dialogue systems improve, the importance of how they interact with humans and build trustworthy relationships is increasing. This study investigated the effect of interaction structures in a generative AI-driven dialogue system to improve relationships through interactions. The dialogue system communicated with subjects in natural language via voice and included a facial expression function. The settings of dyadic and triadic interaction structures were applied to the system. The one-to-one dyadic interaction and triadic interaction with joint attention to a topic were designed following the developmental stages of children’s social communication ability. Subjective evaluations of the dialogues and the system were conducted through a questionnaire. As a result, positive evaluations were based on well-constructed structures. The system’s inappropriate behavior under failed structures reduced the quality of the dialogues and worsened the evaluation of the system. The interaction structures in the system settings needed to match the structures intended by the subjects, whether the structures were dyadic or triadic. Under the matching and successful construction, the system fully demonstrated its dialogue capability and behaved pleasantly with the subjects. By switching interaction structures to adapt to users’ demands, system behavior becomes more appropriate for users.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: AI in Service Interactions · Social Robot Interaction and HRI · Speech and dialogue systems

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Graduate School of System Informatics, Kobe University, 1-1, Rokkodai-cho, Nada-ku, Kobe 657-8501, Japan

Funding

JSPS KAKENHI

References (34)

Show source-provided references
1. Different Chatbots for Different Purposes: Towards a Typology of Chatbots to Understand Interaction Design
2. Reeves, B., and Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places, Cambridge University Press.
3. Psychological, Relational, and Emotional Effects of Self-Disclosure After Conversations with a Chatbot10.1093/joc/jqy026 ↗
4. Okada, Y., Kimoto, M., Iio, T., Shimohara, K., and Shiomi, M. (2023). Two is Better than One: Apologies from Two Robots are Preferred. PLoS ONE, 18.10.1371/journal.pone.0281604 ↗
5. Evaluating Large Language Models in Theory of Mind Tasks10.1073/pnas.2405460121 ↗
6. Jones, C.R., and Bergen, B.K. (2024). People Cannot Distinguish GPT-4 from a Human in a Turing Test. arXiv.
7. Zhou, H., Huang, M., Zhang, T., Zhu, X., and Liu, B. (2018, January 2–7). Emotional Chatting Machine: Emotional Conversation Generation with Internal and External Memory. Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Thirtieth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference and Eighth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, LU, USA.10.1609/aaai.v32i1.11325 ↗
8. The Effects of Health Care Chatbot Personas with Different Social Roles on the Client-Chatbot Bond and Usage Intentions: Development of a Design Codebook and Web-based Study10.2196/32630 ↗
9. Miyanishi, T., Hirayama, J., Kanemura, A., and Kawanabe, M. (2018, January 13–19). Answering Mixed Type Questions About Daily Living Episodes. Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, Sweden.10.24963/ijcai.2018/593 ↗
10. The Human Side of Human-Chatbot Interaction: A Systematic Literature Review of Ten Years of Research on Text-based Chatbots10.1016/j.ijhcs.2021.102630 ↗
11. Svenningsson, N., and Faraon, M. (2019, January 21–23). Artificial Intelligence in Conversational Agents: A Study of Factors Related to Perceived Humanness in Chatbots. Proceedings of the 2019 2nd Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Conference, Kobe, Japan.10.1145/3375959.3375973 ↗
12. Abe, K., Quan, C., Cao, S., and Luo, Z. (2025). Classification of Properties in Human-like Dialogue Systems Using Generative AI to Adapt to Individual Preferences. Appl. Sci., 15.10.3390/app15073466 ↗
13. Designing Personality-Adaptive Conversational Agents for Mental Health Care10.1007/s10796-022-10254-9 ↗
14. Durante, Z., Huang, Q., Wake, N., Gong, R., Park, J.S., Sarkar, B., Taori, R., Noda, Y., Terzopoulos, D., and Choi, Y. (2024). Agent AI: Surveying the Horizons of Multimodal Interaction. arXiv.
15. Artificial Intelligence Chatbot Behavior Change Model for Designing Artificial Intelligence Chatbots to Promote Physical Activity and a Healthy Diet: Viewpoint10.2196/22845 ↗
16. Adding Communicative and Affective Strategies to an Embodied Conversational Agent to Enhance Second Language Learners’ Willingness to Communicate10.1007/s40593-018-0171-6 ↗
17. Herrmann-Werner, A., Festl-Wietek, T., Junne, F., Zipfel, S., and Madany Mamlouk, A. (2021). “Hello, my name is Melinda”—Students’ Views on a Digital Assistant for Navigation in Digital Learning Environments; A Qualitative Interview Study. Front. Educ., 5.10.3389/feduc.2020.541839 ↗
18. The Wolfpack Effect: Perception of Animacy Irresistibly Influences Interactive Behavior10.1177/0956797610388814 ↗
19. Kanakogi, Y., Okumura, Y., Inoue, Y., Kitazaki, M., and Itakura, S. (2013). Rudimentary Sympathy in Preverbal Infants: Preference for Others in Distress. PLoS ONE, 8.10.1371/journal.pone.0065292 ↗
20. Tomasello, M. (2021). Becoming Human: A Theory of Ontogeny, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
21. Theory of mind for a humanoid robot10.1023/A:1013298507114 ↗
22. Real Conversations with Artificial Intelligence: A Comparison Between Human-Human Online Conversations and Human-Chatbot Conversations10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.026 ↗
23. The media inequality: Comparing the Initial Human-Human and Human-AI Social Interactions10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.067 ↗
24. Why People Use Chatbots10.1007/978-3-319-70284-1_30 ↗
25. Loeffler, D., Schmidt, N., and Tscharn, R. (2018, January 5–8). Multimodal Expression of Artificial Emotion in Social Robots Using Color, Motion and Sound. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Chicago, IL, USA.10.1145/3171221.3171261 ↗
26. Facial Expressions of Emotion are not Culturally Universal10.1073/pnas.1200155109 ↗
27. The Relationships Between Attraction of Same-sex Friend and Relationship-maintenance Motivation in the Light of Personal Importance
28. Chidori, H., and Matsuzaki, G. (2012, January 22–24). Impression for the Robot that the Purpose of Communication. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Conference of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, Sapporo, Japan. (In Japanese).
29. A Systematic Review on Affective Computing: Emotion Models, Databases, and Recent Advances10.1016/j.inffus.2022.03.009 ↗
30. Applying the Ethics of AI: A Systematic Review of Tools for Developing and Assessing AI-based Systems10.1007/s10462-024-10740-3 ↗
31. Conversational Agents in Healthcare: A Systematic Review10.1093/jamia/ocy072 ↗
32. Rise of Machine Agency: A Framework for Studying the Psychology of Human–AI Interaction (HAII)10.1093/jcmc/zmz026 ↗
33. Temperament estimation of toddlers from child–robot interaction with explainable artificial intelligence10.1080/01691864.2021.1955001 ↗
34. Social support agents for older adults: Longitudinal affective computing in the home10.1007/s12193-014-0157-0 ↗