Comparison of Common Ground Models for Human--Computer Dialogue

Abstract

Common ground processes [26] can improve performance in communication tasks [72, 42, 43, 24], and understanding these processes will likely benefit human--computer dialogue interfaces. However, there are multiple proposed theories with different implications for interface design. Fusaroli and Tylén [40] achieved a direct comparison by designing two models: one based on alignment theory and the other based on complementarity theory that encapsulated interpersonal synergy and audience design. The current research used these models, extending them to differentiate between interpersonal synergy and audience design. Few studies have tested multiple common ground models against tasks representative of envisioned human--computer interaction (HCI) applications. We report on four such tests, which allowed examination of generalizability of findings. Results supported the complementarity models over the alignment model, and were suggestive of the audience design variant of complementarity, providing guidance for HCI design that differs from contemporary approaches.