Cargando…

Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions

This study investigated which features of AVATAR laughter are perceived threatening for individuals with a fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia), and individuals with no gelotophobia. Laughter samples were systematically varied (e.g., intensity, laughter pitch, and energy for the voice, intensity...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ruch, Willibald F., Platt, Tracey, Hofmann, Jennifer, Niewiadomski, Radosław, Urbain, Jérôme, Mancini, Maurizio, Dupont, Stéphane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25477803
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00928
_version_ 1782345022921768960
author Ruch, Willibald F.
Platt, Tracey
Hofmann, Jennifer
Niewiadomski, Radosław
Urbain, Jérôme
Mancini, Maurizio
Dupont, Stéphane
author_facet Ruch, Willibald F.
Platt, Tracey
Hofmann, Jennifer
Niewiadomski, Radosław
Urbain, Jérôme
Mancini, Maurizio
Dupont, Stéphane
author_sort Ruch, Willibald F.
collection PubMed
description This study investigated which features of AVATAR laughter are perceived threatening for individuals with a fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia), and individuals with no gelotophobia. Laughter samples were systematically varied (e.g., intensity, laughter pitch, and energy for the voice, intensity of facial actions of the face) in three modalities: animated facial expressions, synthesized auditory laughter vocalizations, and motion capture generated puppets displaying laughter body movements. In the online study 123 adults completed, the GELOPH <15 > (Ruch and Proyer, 2008a,b) and rated randomly presented videos of the three modalities for how malicious, how friendly, how real the laughter was (0 not at all to 8 extremely). Additionally, an open question asked which markers led to the perception of friendliness/maliciousness. The current study identified features in all modalities of laughter stimuli that were perceived as malicious in general, and some that were gelotophobia specific. For facial expressions of AVATARS, medium intensity laughs triggered highest maliciousness in the gelotophobes. In the auditory stimuli, the fundamental frequency modulations and the variation in intensity were indicative of maliciousness. In the body, backwards and forward movements and rocking vs. jerking movements distinguished the most malicious from the least malicious laugh. From the open answers, the shape and appearance of the lips curling induced feelings that the expression was malicious for non-gelotophobes and that the movement round the eyes, elicited the face to appear as friendly. This was opposite for gelotophobes. Gelotophobia savvy AVATARS should be of high intensity, containing lip and eye movements and be fast, non-repetitive voiced vocalization, variable and of short duration. It should not contain any features that indicate a down-regulation in the voice or body, or indicate voluntary/cognitive modulation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4235412
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42354122014-12-04 Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions Ruch, Willibald F. Platt, Tracey Hofmann, Jennifer Niewiadomski, Radosław Urbain, Jérôme Mancini, Maurizio Dupont, Stéphane Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience This study investigated which features of AVATAR laughter are perceived threatening for individuals with a fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia), and individuals with no gelotophobia. Laughter samples were systematically varied (e.g., intensity, laughter pitch, and energy for the voice, intensity of facial actions of the face) in three modalities: animated facial expressions, synthesized auditory laughter vocalizations, and motion capture generated puppets displaying laughter body movements. In the online study 123 adults completed, the GELOPH <15 > (Ruch and Proyer, 2008a,b) and rated randomly presented videos of the three modalities for how malicious, how friendly, how real the laughter was (0 not at all to 8 extremely). Additionally, an open question asked which markers led to the perception of friendliness/maliciousness. The current study identified features in all modalities of laughter stimuli that were perceived as malicious in general, and some that were gelotophobia specific. For facial expressions of AVATARS, medium intensity laughs triggered highest maliciousness in the gelotophobes. In the auditory stimuli, the fundamental frequency modulations and the variation in intensity were indicative of maliciousness. In the body, backwards and forward movements and rocking vs. jerking movements distinguished the most malicious from the least malicious laugh. From the open answers, the shape and appearance of the lips curling induced feelings that the expression was malicious for non-gelotophobes and that the movement round the eyes, elicited the face to appear as friendly. This was opposite for gelotophobes. Gelotophobia savvy AVATARS should be of high intensity, containing lip and eye movements and be fast, non-repetitive voiced vocalization, variable and of short duration. It should not contain any features that indicate a down-regulation in the voice or body, or indicate voluntary/cognitive modulation. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-11-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4235412/ /pubmed/25477803 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00928 Text en Copyright © 2014 Ruch, Platt, Hofmann, Niewiadomski, Urbain, Mancini and Dupont. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Ruch, Willibald F.
Platt, Tracey
Hofmann, Jennifer
Niewiadomski, Radosław
Urbain, Jérôme
Mancini, Maurizio
Dupont, Stéphane
Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title_full Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title_fullStr Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title_full_unstemmed Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title_short Gelotophobia and the Challenges of Implementing Laughter into Virtual Agents Interactions
title_sort gelotophobia and the challenges of implementing laughter into virtual agents interactions
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235412/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25477803
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00928
work_keys_str_mv AT ruchwillibaldf gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT platttracey gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT hofmannjennifer gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT niewiadomskiradosław gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT urbainjerome gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT mancinimaurizio gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions
AT dupontstephane gelotophobiaandthechallengesofimplementinglaughterintovirtualagentsinteractions