Impact of two types of partner, perceived or actual, in human–human and human–agent interaction

Abstract: Participants engaged in the Prisoner’s dilemma game with a partner through a computer terminal. We define two types of partner: a perceived partner and an actual partner, and manipulated the two factors independently. A perceived partner means a partner with whom participants imagined them...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Computers in Human Behavior Vol. 28; no. 4; pp. 1286 - 1298
Autores principales: Miwa, Kazuhisa, Terai, Hitoshi
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Elsevier B.V. Jul2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=74662161&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ssf
    uiTerm: 74662161
    longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson)
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        07475632
        JC4
      jtl: Computers in Human Behavior
      issn: 07475632
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jul2012
      vid: 28
      iid: 4
      pid: 2410
      pub: Elsevier B.V.
    artinfo:
      ui:
        74662161
        10.1016/j.chb.2012.02.012
      ppf: 1286
      ppct: 12
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Impact of two types of partner, perceived or actual, in human–human and human–agent interaction
      aug:
        au:
          Miwa, Kazuhisa
          Terai, Hitoshi
        affil: Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
      su:
        Human-computer interaction
        Prisoners
        Human behavior
        Computers
        Games
        Interpersonal relations
        Social skills
        Computer terminals
        Intelligent agents
        Control theory (Engineering)
        Performance evaluation
        Experimental design
      sug:
        subj:
          Human-computer interaction
          Prisoners
          Human behavior
          Computers
          Games
          Interpersonal relations
          Social skills
          Computer Terminal and Other Computer Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
          Computer, computer peripheral and pre-packaged software merchant wholesalers
          Computer and peripheral equipment manufacturing
          Electronic Computer Manufacturing
          Electronics Stores
          Computer and Computer Peripheral Equipment and Software Merchant Wholesalers
          Computer and software stores
          Hobby, Toy, and Game Stores
          Toy and Hobby Goods and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers
          Doll, Toy, and Game Manufacturing
          Computer terminals
          Intelligent agents
          Control theory (Engineering)
          Performance evaluation
          Experimental design
      keyword:
        Human–human interaction
        Human-agent interaction
        Media Equation
        Prisoner’s dilemma game
        Social dilemma
        Human–human interaction
        Human-agent interaction
        Media Equation
        Prisoner’s dilemma game
        Social dilemma
      ab: Abstract: Participants engaged in the Prisoner’s dilemma game with a partner through a computer terminal. We define two types of partner: a perceived partner and an actual partner, and manipulated the two factors independently. A perceived partner means a partner with whom participants imagined themselves to be interacting; instruction given by an experimenter controls the image of the perceived partner. An actual partner can change its behavior. In one scenario participants actually interacted with a human partner, in another scenario their partner was either a mostly cooperating computer agent or a mostly defecting computer agent. Three experiments were performed. The result suggested that the participants’ selection behavior was largely influenced by the instruction given about the partner by the experimenter and not influenced by the partner’s actual behavior. The analysis of the participants’ impressions of the partner showed that the effect of instruction about the partner disappeared. Individual likeability for a partner was very influenced by the partner’s behavior; as the participants incurred more defect actions from the partner, individual likeability for the partner decreased. On the other hand, social likeability for a partner was not so influenced by the partner’s behavior, but rather related to the participants’ own behavior. The participants who made more defect actions rated their partner’s social likeability lower.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: N
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N