Critical information quality dimensions of conversational agents for healthcare

Caihua Liu, Guochao Peng, Shufeng Kong, Chaowang Lan, Haoliang Zhu
{"title":"Critical information quality dimensions of conversational agents for healthcare","authors":"Caihua Liu, Guochao Peng, Shufeng Kong, Chaowang Lan, Haoliang Zhu","doi":"10.47989/ir284561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The new generation of information technology changes the ways of information seeking. Conversational agents start to be applied in public to support information seeking and decision making and provide a variety of services to users such as healthcare education and consultation. The information quality of conversational agents for healthcare determines the quality of these services, while identifying critical dimensions used to assess the agents’ information quality that helps better strategise priorities for ensuring information quality has received limited attention in the literature. Method. This study conducted a questionnaire survey to investigate the critical dimensions of information quality of healthcare conversational agents. After excluding two responses from participants who declined to fill in the questionnaire, this study retained 231 responses for data analysis, out of the total 233 participants who initially responded to the survey. Analysis. The research describes the demographic information of the participants, the behavioural characteristics of using healthcare conversational agents, and the critical dimensions of information quality of the agents perceived by the participants in the survey, employing descriptive statistics. Furthermore, ANOVA was employed to compare the variances in the perceived importance of information quality dimensions between participants who had used a healthcare conversational agent and those who had not. Results. Understandability and trustworthiness were the two top concerns for the information quality of the agents from the participants’ perspective in this study. Conclusions. Results of the study show that the experience of using or not using the agents affected the participants’ perceived importance of the agent’ information quality dimensions.","PeriodicalId":509289,"journal":{"name":"Information Research an international electronic journal","volume":"94 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Research an international electronic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47989/ir284561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. The new generation of information technology changes the ways of information seeking. Conversational agents start to be applied in public to support information seeking and decision making and provide a variety of services to users such as healthcare education and consultation. The information quality of conversational agents for healthcare determines the quality of these services, while identifying critical dimensions used to assess the agents’ information quality that helps better strategise priorities for ensuring information quality has received limited attention in the literature. Method. This study conducted a questionnaire survey to investigate the critical dimensions of information quality of healthcare conversational agents. After excluding two responses from participants who declined to fill in the questionnaire, this study retained 231 responses for data analysis, out of the total 233 participants who initially responded to the survey. Analysis. The research describes the demographic information of the participants, the behavioural characteristics of using healthcare conversational agents, and the critical dimensions of information quality of the agents perceived by the participants in the survey, employing descriptive statistics. Furthermore, ANOVA was employed to compare the variances in the perceived importance of information quality dimensions between participants who had used a healthcare conversational agent and those who had not. Results. Understandability and trustworthiness were the two top concerns for the information quality of the agents from the participants’ perspective in this study. Conclusions. Results of the study show that the experience of using or not using the agents affected the participants’ perceived importance of the agent’ information quality dimensions.
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
医疗保健对话式代理的关键信息质量维度
引言新一代信息技术改变了人们寻求信息的方式。对话式代理开始应用于公共领域,以支持信息搜索和决策制定,并为用户提供各种服务,如医疗保健教育和咨询。医疗保健对话式代理的信息质量决定了这些服务的质量,而确定用于评估代理信息质量的关键维度,以帮助更好地制定确保信息质量的优先战略,在文献中受到的关注却很有限。研究方法本研究进行了一项问卷调查,以研究医疗保健对话代理信息质量的关键维度。在排除了两名拒绝填写问卷的参与者的回复后,本研究保留了 231 份回复进行数据分析,而最初回复调查的参与者共有 233 人。分析。本研究采用描述性统计方法描述了调查参与者的人口统计学信息、使用医疗保健对话代理的行为特征,以及调查参与者认为的代理信息质量的关键维度。此外,还采用方差分析来比较使用过医疗保健对话式代理的参与者与未使用过医疗保健对话式代理的参与者对信息质量各维度重要性的认知差异。 结果显示在本研究中,从参与者的角度来看,可理解性和可信度是他们最关心的两个信息质量问题。 结论研究结果表明,使用或未使用代理的经历影响了参与者对代理信息质量维度重要性的感知。
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
Who is using ChatGPT and why?: extending the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model Training in open access for doctoral students: results of a survey of current and recent students and supervisors Regimes of participation: theorising participatory archives from the outset of archivists' views on archival institutions and user participation in Scandinavia Reorienting information searching research by applying a situated abilities perspective Approaches to information-seeking behaviour in psychology: a comparison of early and contemporary studies
×
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