Affiliation:
1. Computer Science Department, Faculty of science and information technology, International University, Phnom Penh, Cambodia
2. Computer engineering department, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
This study examined user preferences for ChatGPT-powered conversational interfaces vs traditional
techniques. The study collected data from 175 selected volunteers utilizing a survey questionnaire.
Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to detect user preferences and compare them to the
literature review. The study found that 70% of users chose ChatGPT-powered conversational interfaces
over traditional techniques, citing convenience, efficiency, and personalization. Demographic data was
explored. The participants were evenly distributed between male and female (50%) and aged 18 to 55
(mean = 35 years). This study affects ChatGPT and conversational AI development. The results indicate
that users want to use these technologies in their daily lives. To improve ChatGPT, further study is needed
in this area. However, this study's tiny sample size must be considered. To confirm these findings and
investigate other factors affecting conversational interface user preferences, bigger and more diverse
samples are needed.
Publisher
Mesopotamian Academic Press
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Environmental Science,Geography, Planning and Development,General Social Sciences,General Arts and Humanities,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,Ecology,Geography, Planning and Development,Earth and Planetary Sciences (miscellaneous),General Environmental Science,Environmental Chemistry,Oceanography,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,Ecology,Aquatic Science,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics,Law,Sociology and Political Science,Anthropology,Law,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Law,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),General Social Sciences,Law,Public Administration,Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference5 articles.
1. [1] Ö. Aydın, and E. J. A. a. S. Karaarslan, “OpenAI ChatGPT generated literature review: Digital twin in healthcare,” 2022.
2. [2] A. Ram, R. Prasad, C. Khatri, A. Venkatesh, R. Gabriel, Q. Liu, J. Nunn, B. Hedayatnia, M. Cheng, and A. J. a. p. a. Nagar, “Conversational ai: The science behind the alexa prize,” 2018.
3. [3] M. Aljanabi, M. Ghazi, A. H. Ali, S. A. J. I. J. F. C. S. Abed, and Mathematics, “ChatGpt: Open Possibilities,” vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 62-64, 2023.
4. [4] B. Gordijn, H. t. J. M. Have, Health Care, and Philosophy, “ChatGPT: evolution or revolution?,” pp. 1-2, 2023.
5. [5] S. F. Jentzsch, S. Höhn, and N. Hochgeschwender, "Conversational interfaces for explainable AI: a human-centred approach." pp. 77-92.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献