[emcai] EMCA/AI network - Reminder meeting today

Fri Sep 27 03:22:38 MDT 2024

Hello everyone,

thank you -- looking forward to meeting you all very soon!

I just realized that we haven't properly circulated the news that the
scoping review of EMCA studies of AI -- written together with the network
members Lynn de Rijk, Andreas Liesenfeld, Wyke Stommel & Saul Albert, and
discussed some time ago in one of the EMCA-AI network meetings -- has been
recently published in the journal *AI & Society *(open access):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-024-01919-x

Many thanks again for all your feedback and comments that have enabled us
to improve the paper!

All the best,

Jakub

pá 27. 9. 2024 v 10:00 odesílatel Rijk, L.E.M. de (Lynn) via emcai <
emcai at conversationanalysis.org> napsal:

> Dear EMCA/AI network members,
>
>
>
> Hereby a reminder that we have our first session after summer break today,
> from 12.30-14.00 CET at: https://liu-se.zoom.us/j/62999036262
>
> For new members to the list, you can find the dates for upcoming events
> here (more details will be added and will also follow by mail):
> https://emcai.conversationanalysis.org/events/
>
>
>
> We hope to see many of you this afternoon! And again many thanks to
> Damien for preparing all of this (see details of this session below).
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Lynn, Hannah and Saul
>
>
>
>
>
> *Session details - 27 September*
>
> The last EMCAI session outlined several interesting “assumptions” on what
> constitutes “interaction” in “human-robot interaction” or “human-VUI
> interaction”. Because the discussion was still lively when time ran out, we
> invite you to join us for one final session on the very same topic: *What
> do “we” (EMCA researchers, non-EMCA-oriented HRI researchers, engineers,
> designers, tech companies' employees, etc.) respectively index when we
> formulate phrases such as “conversing with a robot”, “interacting with a
> vocal agent”, etc.?*
>
>
>
> Outlined below is a tentative list of the prominent assumptions debated
> last time. Some of those assumptions may prevail in “the industry” (i.e.,
> in private companies working on commercial robots or VUIs), while others
> may be at the core of different disciplines in HRI/HCI academic research.
> Some might be documented across multiple papers and fields, while others
> might still remain unexplored.
>
>    1. *Human-robot interaction as "information transfer" *rather than
>    "dealing with practical problems in situated activities".
>    2. *Human-robot interaction as questions and answers *– a focus on
>    turns' “composition” over turns' “position”.
>    3. *Human-robot interaction as non-contingent, definite, and
>    exhaustively describable *– the definiteness of reality and the
>    possibility of its description rather than the "essential vagueness" of
>    social life.
>    4. *Human-robot Conversation as a practical achievement that it is
>    pointless to reconstruct analytically* (e.g., using CA) to, then,
>    extract a set of granular guidelines or rules – conversational design as
>    "gut feeling”.
>    5. *Human-robot interaction as interactions with machines and not
>    interactions that involve machines* – “human-machine coupling” rather
>    than "interaction" in a situated and holistic sense.
>
> *1) For the next session*: To expand, correct, or refine this brief
> preliminary list, we invite you to prepare any data that you would like to
> discuss (articles, videos, documents, etc.) and that may exemplify a common
> assumption about “human-robot interaction” or “human-VUI interaction”. Our
> intention is not to have a debate on “interaction” as a concept, but to
> investigate what is indexed by different HRI actors as an “interaction”,
> and to explore if these assumptions impact the design of robots or VUIs –
> as well as the tools used to design or program them. For example, do these
> assumptions find their way into the most recent conversational
> technologies, such as chatbots based on large language models like chatGPT?
> And if so, what evidence can substantiate these claims? We would love to
> discuss any data you might want to present, even tangentially related to
> these topics.
>
>
>
> *2) As a starting point, *the candidate assumptions discussed during our
> previous session have been tentatively mapped onto a Miro board. This Miro
> board lays out assumptions that were hypothesized to be prevailing in HRI,
> as well as alternative positions that contrasted with those prevailing
> assumptions:
>
> - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVK73KAOQ=/?share_link_id=886506295959
> <https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVK73KAOQ=/?share_link_id=431856323403>
>
> -Password: assumptions
>
> We will try to use this board as a basis for our discussions next time. In
> the meanwhile, we invite you to modify this collaborative Miro board as you
> see fit. Feel free to add, modify, or move assumptions, contrasting
> assumptions, comments, criticism, questions, empirical data, or to draw new
> clusters around the preexisting sticky notes. Similarly, do not hesitate to
> heavily update the Miro board if you think about better organizing
> principles or if you have more catchy names for existing assumptions. (For
> those who participated in our last session, sorry in advance if we
> miscategorized your verbatims!)
>
>
>
>
> --
> emcai mailing list
> emcai at conversationanalysis.org
>
> http://conversationanalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/emcai_conversationanalysis.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://conversationanalysis.org/pipermail/emcai_conversationanalysis.org/attachments/20240927/e34f3c73/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 2024--Mlynar&deRijk&Liesenfeld&Stommel&Albert_-_AISituatedAction.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1193218 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://conversationanalysis.org/pipermail/emcai_conversationanalysis.org/attachments/20240927/e34f3c73/attachment-0001.pdf>