PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: The use of chatbots in mental health support has increased exponentially in recent years, with studies showing that they may be effective in treating mental health problems. More recently, the use of visual avatars called digital humans has been introduced. Digital humans have the capability to use facial expressions as another dimension in human-computer interactions. It is important to study the difference in emotional response and usability preferences between text-based chatbots and digital humans for interacting with mental health services.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore to what extent a digital human interface and a text-only chatbot interface differed in usability when tested by healthy participants, using BETSY (Behavior, Emotion, Therapy System, and You) which uses 2 distinct interfaces: a digital human with anthropomorphic features and a text-only user interface. We also set out to explore how chatbot-generated conversations on mental health (specific to each interface) affected self-reported feelings and biometrics.
METHODS: We explored to what extent a digital human with anthropomorphic features differed from a traditional text-only chatbot regarding perception of usability through the System Usability Scale, emotional reactions through electroencephalography, and feelings of closeness. Healthy participants (n=45) were randomized to 2 groups that used a digital human with anthropomorphic features (n=25) or a text-only chatbot with no such features (n=20). The groups were compared by linear regression analysis and t tests.
RESULTS: No differences were observed between the text-only and digital human groups regarding demographic features. The mean System Usability Scale score was 75.34 (SD 10.01; range 57-90) for the text-only chatbot versus 64.80 (SD 14.14; range 40-90) for the digital human interface. Both groups scored their respective chatbot interfaces as average or above average in usability. Women were more likely to report feeling annoyed by BETSY.
CONCLUSIONS: The text-only chatbot was perceived as significantly more user-friendly than the digital human, although there were no significant differences in electroencephalography measurements. Male participants exhibited lower levels of annoyance with both interfaces, contrary to previously reported findings.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore to what extent a digital human interface and a text-only chatbot interface differed in usability when tested by healthy participants, using BETSY (Behavior, Emotion, Therapy System, and You) which uses 2 distinct interfaces: a digital human with anthropomorphic features and a text-only user interface. We also set out to explore how chatbot-generated conversations on mental health (specific to each interface) affected self-reported feelings and biometrics.
METHODS: We explored to what extent a digital human with anthropomorphic features differed from a traditional text-only chatbot regarding perception of usability through the System Usability Scale, emotional reactions through electroencephalography, and feelings of closeness. Healthy participants (n=45) were randomized to 2 groups that used a digital human with anthropomorphic features (n=25) or a text-only chatbot with no such features (n=20). The groups were compared by linear regression analysis and t tests.
RESULTS: No differences were observed between the text-only and digital human groups regarding demographic features. The mean System Usability Scale score was 75.34 (SD 10.01; range 57-90) for the text-only chatbot versus 64.80 (SD 14.14; range 40-90) for the digital human interface. Both groups scored their respective chatbot interfaces as average or above average in usability. Women were more likely to report feeling annoyed by BETSY.
CONCLUSIONS: The text-only chatbot was perceived as significantly more user-friendly than the digital human, although there were no significant differences in electroencephalography measurements. Male participants exhibited lower levels of annoyance with both interfaces, contrary to previously reported findings.
摘要：
背景：近年来，聊天机器人在心理健康支持中的使用呈指数增长，研究表明它们可能有效治疗心理健康问题。最近,已经引入了称为数字人类的视觉化身的使用。数字人类有能力使用面部表情作为人机交互的另一个维度。重要的是研究基于文本的聊天机器人和数字人类与心理健康服务交互之间的情绪反应和可用性偏好的差异。
目的：本研究旨在探讨在健康参与者进行测试时，数字人机界面和纯文本聊天机器人界面的可用性在多大程度上不同。使用BETSY(行为，情感,治疗系统,和您）使用2个不同的界面：具有拟人化特征的数字人类和纯文本用户界面。我们还着手探索聊天机器人生成的关于心理健康的对话（特定于每个界面）如何影响自我报告的感觉和生物识别技术。
方法：我们探索了具有拟人化特征的数字人类在多大程度上不同于传统的纯文本聊天机器人，通过系统可用性量表感知可用性，通过脑电图的情绪反应，和亲密的感觉。健康参与者（n=45）被随机分为两组，使用具有拟人化特征的数字人类（n=25）或没有这种特征的纯文本聊天机器人（n=20）。各组比较采用线性回归分析和t检验。
结果：在人口统计学特征方面，纯文本和数字人群之间没有观察到差异。纯文本聊天机器人的平均系统可用性量表评分为75.34（SD10.01；范围57-90），而数字人机界面的平均系统可用性评分为64.80（SD14.14；范围40-90）。两组都将各自的聊天机器人界面的可用性评分为平均水平或高于平均水平。女性更有可能报告对BETSY感到恼火。
结论：人们认为纯文本聊天机器人比数字人类更人性化，尽管脑电图测量没有显着差异。男性参与者对两个界面都表现出较低的烦恼，与以前报道的发现相反。
目的：本研究旨在探讨在健康参与者进行测试时，数字人机界面和纯文本聊天机器人界面的可用性在多大程度上不同。使用BETSY(行为，情感,治疗系统,和您）使用2个不同的界面：具有拟人化特征的数字人类和纯文本用户界面。我们还着手探索聊天机器人生成的关于心理健康的对话（特定于每个界面）如何影响自我报告的感觉和生物识别技术。
方法：我们探索了具有拟人化特征的数字人类在多大程度上不同于传统的纯文本聊天机器人，通过系统可用性量表感知可用性，通过脑电图的情绪反应，和亲密的感觉。健康参与者（n=45）被随机分为两组，使用具有拟人化特征的数字人类（n=25）或没有这种特征的纯文本聊天机器人（n=20）。各组比较采用线性回归分析和t检验。
结果：在人口统计学特征方面，纯文本和数字人群之间没有观察到差异。纯文本聊天机器人的平均系统可用性量表评分为75.34（SD10.01；范围57-90），而数字人机界面的平均系统可用性评分为64.80（SD14.14；范围40-90）。两组都将各自的聊天机器人界面的可用性评分为平均水平或高于平均水平。女性更有可能报告对BETSY感到恼火。
结论：人们认为纯文本聊天机器人比数字人类更人性化，尽管脑电图测量没有显着差异。男性参与者对两个界面都表现出较低的烦恼，与以前报道的发现相反。
