Assessing Objective Indicators of Users' Cognitive Load During Proactive In-Car Dialogs

Maria Schmidt, David Helbig, Ojashree Bhandare, D. Stier, W. Minker, S. Werner
{"title":"Assessing Objective Indicators of Users' Cognitive Load During Proactive In-Car Dialogs","authors":"Maria Schmidt, David Helbig, Ojashree Bhandare, D. Stier, W. Minker, S. Werner","doi":"10.1145/3314183.3324985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using Personal Assistants (PAs) via voice becomes increasingly usual as more and more devices in different environments offer this capability, such as Google Assistant, Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, Microsoft Cortana, Mercedes-Benz MBUX or BMW Intelligent Personal Assistant. PAs help users to set reminders, find their way through traffic, or send messages to friends and colleagues. While serving the users' needs, PAs constantly collect personal data in order to personalize their services and adapt their behavior. In order to find out which objective Cognitive Load (CL) indicators reflect the users' perception of proactive system behavior in six specific use cases of an in-car PA, we conducted a Wizard of Oz study in a driving simulator with 42 participants. We varied traffic density and tracked physiological data, such as heart rate (HR) and electrodermal activity (EDA). We assessed the users' CL during the interaction with the PA by employing these data as well as real-time driving data (RTDA) via the Controller Area Network (CAN bus). The results show that physiological data like HR and EDA are not suitable to be used as indicators for the users' CL in this experiment. This is because the tracked physiological data do not show significant differences with respect to different traffic densities or proactivity. At the same time it has to be discussed whether the used type of recording physiological data is robust enough for our purposes. Concerning driving data, only the acceleration parameter showed a tendency towards differences between age groups, though insignificantly. The same is valid for the steering angle parameter when comparing male and female users. For future work, we plan to additionally evaluate subjective CL measures and other ratings to see whether these show more significant differences between the (non-)proactive assistants, traffic densities, or use cases.","PeriodicalId":240482,"journal":{"name":"Adjunct Publication of the 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization","volume":"9 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adjunct Publication of the 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3314183.3324985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Using Personal Assistants (PAs) via voice becomes increasingly usual as more and more devices in different environments offer this capability, such as Google Assistant, Amazon Alexa, Apple Siri, Microsoft Cortana, Mercedes-Benz MBUX or BMW Intelligent Personal Assistant. PAs help users to set reminders, find their way through traffic, or send messages to friends and colleagues. While serving the users' needs, PAs constantly collect personal data in order to personalize their services and adapt their behavior. In order to find out which objective Cognitive Load (CL) indicators reflect the users' perception of proactive system behavior in six specific use cases of an in-car PA, we conducted a Wizard of Oz study in a driving simulator with 42 participants. We varied traffic density and tracked physiological data, such as heart rate (HR) and electrodermal activity (EDA). We assessed the users' CL during the interaction with the PA by employing these data as well as real-time driving data (RTDA) via the Controller Area Network (CAN bus). The results show that physiological data like HR and EDA are not suitable to be used as indicators for the users' CL in this experiment. This is because the tracked physiological data do not show significant differences with respect to different traffic densities or proactivity. At the same time it has to be discussed whether the used type of recording physiological data is robust enough for our purposes. Concerning driving data, only the acceleration parameter showed a tendency towards differences between age groups, though insignificantly. The same is valid for the steering angle parameter when comparing male and female users. For future work, we plan to additionally evaluate subjective CL measures and other ratings to see whether these show more significant differences between the (non-)proactive assistants, traffic densities, or use cases.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
主动车内对话中用户认知负荷的客观指标评估
随着越来越多的设备在不同的环境中提供这种功能,通过语音使用个人助理(PAs)变得越来越普遍,比如谷歌助理、亚马逊Alexa、苹果Siri、微软小娜、梅赛德斯-奔驰MBUX或宝马智能个人助理。pa可以帮助用户设置提醒,在交通中找到自己的路,或者向朋友和同事发送消息。在满足用户需求的同时,认证机构不断收集个人数据,以提供个性化的服务和适应用户的行为。为了找出哪些客观认知负荷(CL)指标反映了用户在车载PA的六个特定用例中对主动系统行为的感知,我们在驾驶模拟器中进行了42名参与者的绿野仙踪研究。我们改变了交通密度,并跟踪了生理数据,如心率(HR)和皮电活动(EDA)。通过使用这些数据以及通过控制器局域网(CAN总线)的实时驾驶数据(RTDA),我们评估了用户在与PA交互过程中的CL。结果表明,HR和EDA等生理数据不适合作为本实验中用户CL的指标。这是因为跟踪的生理数据在不同的交通密度或主动性方面没有显示出显着差异。与此同时,必须讨论所使用的记录生理数据的类型是否足以满足我们的目的。在驾驶数据方面,只有加速度参数表现出年龄组间差异的趋势,但差异不显著。在比较男性和女性用户时,转向角参数也是如此。对于未来的工作,我们计划额外评估主观CL度量和其他评级,以查看这些是否在(非)主动助手、交通密度或用例之间显示出更显著的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Shaping the Reaction: Community Characteristics and Emotional Tone of Citizen Responses to Robotics Videos at TED versus YouTube Supporting the Exploration of Cultural Heritage Information via Search Behavior Analysis Exer-model: A User Model for Scrutinising Long-term Models of Physical Activity from Multiple Sensors NEAR: A Partner to Explain Any Factorised Recommender System Tikkoun Sofrim: A WebApp for Personalization and Adaptation of Crowdsourcing Transcriptions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1