- Listening Chat System End Design nishio20190729_0218
What we noticed in this case
- Assumption: “How do we estimate the user’s emotional state to change the flow of the conversation?”
- → “If the assumption is that the user agrees to the purpose and uses the command in advance, why not just educate the user on the emotional expression command?”
- I found myself taking a step back in perspective.
1> Let’s talk. 0> What would you like to see happen in this conversation? 1> I would like to think about how best to design the end of the conversation 0> Is there anything else you can tell us about that design? 1> Now that there is no design for the end, the dialogue continues to linger, which is not good! 0> What kind of endings are those? 1> When the user says, “I see! and when something strikes me, I want to end up fleshing it out, and when I’m in a mode where it’s not working, I want to remind them of their purpose and get them back on the road. 0> Is there anything else about that user? 1> If I can observe the user’s emotions, I’d like to change the way I talk to them, whether it’s “I’m excited to discover something new” or “I’m getting annoyed that my questions don’t stick well”. 0> What type of user is this user? 1> The type of user who feels the value of verbalizing what cannot be verbalized. 0> How do you know the user? 1> I feel like I should specify in advance that that’s the purpose. 0> Is there anything else you can tell us about its purpose? 1> If we clearly state “This is a system to elicit “I see"" in advance, and say “If you think “I see”, please type “I see"", is there no need to presume it? 0> anything else about that advance? 1> I see this as stationery for intellectual production, and stationery increases the value you produce by learning how to use it beforehand. 0> How do you know its advance? 1> There’s no way to know if the user has learned beforehand, and it’s the user’s responsibility not to learn, so you don’t need to know. 0> Where is that advance located? 1> NGKW 0> Where is that user located? 1> Not restricted in location, can be used from a smartphone while traveling on a train. 0> Is there anything else about that phone? 1> This is another newly available stationery for intellectual production that mankind can use to increase productivity. 0> Is there anything else you can tell us about that stationery? 1> For example, the pen, a primitive stationery tool, can hold more information than the memory in the brain of a living person by writing down thoughts. 0> What do you value? 1> Stationery improves human intellectual productivity. 0> What is the relationship between that stationery and the user? 1> Stationery enhances users’ intellectual productivity 0> Is that user the same as stationery? Is it different? 1> No, sir. 0> What happens to the stationery when the user 1> NG 0> What happens to the user when the stationery 1> NG 0> What is between the user and the stationery? 1> There is a learning cost. The value of stationery is demonstrated not only by the stationery as a thing, but also by paying the cost of learning it 0> How do you know its stationery? 1> NG 0> Where is that stationery located? 1> Bye-bye. 1> (In this case, the value creation was in the fact that I realized that I could take a step back and think, “If the user agrees with the purpose in advance, why don’t I just educate the user on the emotional expression commands there?)
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/終わりのデザインについての会話 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.