IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v41y2022i16p3519-3529.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

User experience with conversational agent: a systematic review of assessment methods

Author

Listed:
  • Carla Tubin
  • João Pedro Mazuco Rodriguez
  • Ana Carolina Bertoletti de Marchi

Abstract

Conversational agents are becoming popular for providing a more natural and realistic user experience. New studies have become significant to understand how to assess this experience, mainly because of the increase in applications of this nature. We systematically reviewed the literature to identify how the user experience is assessed when interacting with conversational agents. A total of 443 studies were identified in the ACM, IEEE, Springer, and Scopus databases. Of these, 27 studies met the eligibility criteria. Most studies used their own evaluation methods, without adopting questionnaires validated for UX evaluation. Few studies used assessment tools before participants interacted with agents, and only two carried out assessments before, during, and after use. The results of the assessments can be better if specific instruments for UX are adopted. Furthermore, it is necessary to assess the experience at different times and use combined methods, to understand aspects related to the participants’ feelings and behaviours.

Suggested Citation

  • Carla Tubin & João Pedro Mazuco Rodriguez & Ana Carolina Bertoletti de Marchi, 2022. "User experience with conversational agent: a systematic review of assessment methods," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(16), pages 3519-3529, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:41:y:2022:i:16:p:3519-3529
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2021.2001047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2001047
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2001047?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:41:y:2022:i:16:p:3519-3529. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.