Reducing user linguistic variability in speech interaction through lexical and syntactic priming
Authors: 
Dominique Knutsen, Philippe Bretier, Christine Ros, Margot Poletti, Manuel Gimenes, François Rigalleau, Ludovic Le BigotAuthors Info & Claims
Dominique Knutsen, Philippe Bretier, Christine Ros, Margot Poletti, Manuel Gimenes, François Rigalleau, Ludovic Le BigotAuthors Info & ClaimsPages 160 - 167
Abstract
Motivation -- To reduce user linguistic variability in human-system interaction.
Research approach -- An experiment was conducted in which 72 participants interacted over the phone with a simulated natural language dialogue system. The main manipulation concerned the lexical content and the structure of the message prompts.
Findings/Design -- The results confirm that users align with the system on the lexical and structural levels in human-system dialogue. However, the strength of the syntactic alignment depends on the content of the prime.
Research limitations/Implications -- This experiment should be replicated user a greater number of different prime system messages.
Originality/Value -- By manipulating prime content, this study allows investigating alignment strength as a function of word frequency and user preferences.
Take-away message -- Lexical and syntactic priming can be used to reduce user linguistic variability in human-system interaction, but the strength of these phenomena depends on the content of the prime.
References
[1]
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390--412.
[2]
Bock, K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355--387.
[3]
Bock, K., & Griffin, Z. M. (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 177--192.
[4]
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., McLean, J. F., & Brown, A. (2011). The role of beliefs in lexical alignment: Evidence from dialogs with humans and computers. Cognition, 121, 41--57.
[5]
Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., McLean, J. F., & Nass, C. I. (2003). Syntactic alignment between computers and people: the role of belief about mental states. Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston, July 2003.
[6]
Brennan, S. E. (1991). Conversation with and through computers. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 1, 67--86.
[7]
Brennan, S. E. (1996). Lexical entrainment in spontaneous dialog. Proceedings, 1996 International Symposium of Spoken Dialogue, ISSD-96. Philadelphia, PA.
[8]
Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 1482--1493.
[9]
Chen, F., 2006. Designing human interface in speech technology. New York: Springer.
[10]
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[11]
Cohen, M., Giangola, J. P, & Balogh, J. (2004). Voice user interface design. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
[12]
Ferreira, V. S., Kleinman, D., Kraljic, T., & Siu, Y. (2012). Do priming effects in dialogue reflect partner- or task-oriented expectations? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 309--316.
[13]
Forster, K. I., & Davis, C. (1984). Repetition priming and frequency attenuation in lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 10, 680--698.
[14]
Fraser, N. M., & Gilbert, G. N. (1991). Simulating speech systems. Computer Speech and Language, 5, 81--99.
[15]
Gardner-Bonneau, D. & Blanchard, H. E. (Eds.). (2008). Human factors and voice interactive systems. (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.
[16]
Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying what you mean in dialogue: a study in conceptual and semantic coordination. Cognition, 27, 181--218.
[17]
Gregg, V. (1976). Word frequency, recognition and recall. In J. Brown (Ed.), Recall and recognition (pp. 183--216). New York: Wiley.
[18]
Harris, R. A. (2005). Voice interaction design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Elsevier.
[19]
Hartsuiker, R. J., Bernolet, S., Schoonbaert, S., Speybroeck, S., & Vanderelst, D. (2008). Syntactic priming persists while the lexical boost decays: Evidence from written and spoken dialogue. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 214--238.
[20]
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Westenberg, C. (2000). Word order priming in written and spoken sentence production. Cognition, 75, B27--B39.
[21]
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434--446.
[22]
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1968). The interpretation of the passive voice. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 69--73.
[23]
Lai, J., Karat, C. M., & Yankelovich, N. (2008). Conversational speech interfaces and technologies. The human-computer interaction handbook: Fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications (2nd ed., pp. 481--491). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
[24]
Leiser, R. G. (1989). Exploiting Convergence to Improve Natural Language Understanding. Interacting with Computers, 1, 284--298.
[25]
Levelt, W. J. M., & Kelter, S. (1982). Surface form and memory in question answering. Cognitive psychology, 14, 78--106.
[26]
Metzing, C. & Brennan, S. E. (2003). When conceptual pacts are broken: Partner-specific effects in the comprehension of referring expressions. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 201--213.
[27]
New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 516--524.
[28]
Pearson, J., Hu, J., Branigan, H. P., Pickering, M. J., & Nass, C. (2006). Adaptive language behavior in HCI: how expectations and beliefs about a system affect users' word choice. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems, pp. 1177--1180. Montréxal, April 2006.
[29]
Pickering, M. J., & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 427--459.
[30]
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169--226.
[31]
Qu, C., Brinkman, W. P., Wiggers, P., & Heynderickx, I. (2010). Visual priming to improve keyword detection in free speech dialogue. Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics (ECCE), pp. 337--340. Delft, the Netherlands, August 2010.
[32]
Scheepers, C. (2003). Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence of structural configuration in sentence production Cognition, 89, 179--205.
[33]
Thothathiri, M., & Snedeker, J. (2008). Give and take: Syntactic priming during spoken language comprehension. Cognition, 108, 51--68.
[34]
Tooley, K. M., & Traxler, M. J. (2010). Syntactic priming effects in comprehension: A critical review. Language and Linguistics Compass, 4, 925--937.
[35]
Zoltan-Ford, E. (1991). How to get people to say and type what computers can understand. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 527--547.
- Reducing user linguistic variability in speech interaction through lexical and syntactic priming
Recommendations
Leveraging Diverse Lexical Resources for Textual Entailment Recognition
Special Issue on RITESince the problem of textual entailment recognition requires capturing semantic relations between diverse expressions of language, linguistic and world knowledge play an important role. In this article, we explore the effectiveness of different types of ...
The generation of syntactic structure based on the spherical structure of lexical meaning
CLSW'12: Proceedings of the 13th Chinese conference on Chinese Lexical SemanticsTaking "Apple" and "Red" as examples, and basing on the new description of lexical meaning structure, we hold that the lexical meaning structure was composed of three elements: referent meaning, attribute meaning and feature-value meaning. In the ...
ERPs Reflect Lexical Identification in Word Fragment Priming
Behavioral evidence suggests that spoken word recognition involves the temporary activation of multiple entries in a listener's mental lexicon. This phenomenon can be demonstrated in cross-modal word fragment priming (CMWP). In CMWP, an auditory word ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © 2012 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
- EACE: European Association for Cognitive Ergonomics
- Edinburgh Napier University, UK: Edinburgh Napier University, UK
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 28 August 2012
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- Orange Labs
Conference
ECCE '12
Sponsor:
- EACE
- Edinburgh Napier University, UK
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 56 of 91 submissions, 62%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 83Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)1
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Feb 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in