If You Don't Have Anything Nice to
Say...:
The Effect of Systems Breakdown on Human-Computer Interactions
Student Researchers: Veena Raman, Meghan Sanders, Patty Michael-Wharton, and Jennifer Warren. This paper is based on a graduate project as part of a special topics seminar.
Faculty Supervisor: Dr. S. Shyam Sundar
Raman, V.V., Sanders, M. S., Michael, P. W., & Warren, J. (2004 May). If you don't have anything nice to say...: The effect of systems breakdown on human-computer interactions. Paper presented to the Communication and Technology Division at the 54th annual convention of the International Communication Association (ICA), New Orleans, LA.
Introduction
As computer technologies evolve, they appear to be seamlessly merging into individuals’
everyday lives and experiences. Research has indicated that human-computer interactions
(HCI) are fundamentally social and natural, similar to human-to-human interaction
in real life. If users treat computers socially, then there is a strong possibility
that users may not function to their fullest potential at work or at home if
they encounter a negative interaction (i.e. computer breakdown). While good
implementations of technologies mimicking human characteristics can generate
social responses, most technologies are still susceptible to breakdowns. Errors
made by computer systems are unlike any that a human would make. Do breakdowns
make salient the idea that the computer is a medium and interrupt the user’s
orientation toward the computer as a source? This study examines the effect
of system breakdown on the social responses exhibited by individuals towards
computers and how predispositions affect these responses.
Specifically, we asked the following research question:
RQ1: What is the relationship between affinity seeking and affinity, and affinity seeking and politeness?
RQ2: What is the relationship between computer breakdown and politeness, and breakdown and affinity towards the computer?
RQ3: Will frustration serve as a mediator between the effect of computer breakdown and politeness in rating the computer?
Method
A within subjects repeated measures experiment was conducted in order to investigate
these questions. A total of 88 (48.9 % male, 51.1% female) participants were
first randomly assigned to one of three different versions of a clip set which
were designed to reflect three types of characters – hero, villain, and
ambiguous, and which contained a movie synopsis, video clip, and screenplay
excerpt. Each clip set consisted of each character portrayed by three different
actors. For example, a participant may have seen Michael Keaton portray a hero,
Aidan Quinn portray an ambiguously-valenced character, and David Duchovny portray
a villain. In a different clip set, a participant may have seen Aidan Quinn
as the hero, Michael Keaton as the villain, and David Duchovny as the ambiguously-valenced
character. Each actor portrayed all three character types. In each of the three
versions, the storyline, names, and actions of the character were changed to
reflect the roles of hero, villain, and ambiguous characters. After exposure
to one of the three versions of the clip set, participants were asked to respond
to scales measuring their identification with and enjoyment of the three types
of characters.
Results
RQ1: Affinity-seeking significantly affected affinity for the computer but not politeness towards it. However, affinity-seeking stopped being a significant predictor when levels of investment, involvement and frustration were taken into account. Nor was it significant when the difference between pre- and post affinity ratings were taken into account.
RQ2: Participants in the control or no breakdown condition
exhibited significantly more affinity for the computer than did the early breakdown
participants and the late breakdown participants. Politeness also differed significantly
by condition, such that participants in the early breakdown condition were more
polite than those in the late breakdown.

RQ3: When investment, frustration and involvement were taken into account, condition exerted a significant influence on affinity. In addition, condition also had a strong effect on frustration, such that participants in the early breakdown condition were more frustrated than in the late and control conditions. These results suggest that frustration is a mediator for predisposition's effects on affinity towards the computer, but not a person's politeness levels.
Conclusion
The results of this study indicate that social responses to computers did change
as a result of the system’s breakdown, but only in terms of affinity.
However, people were polite and exhibited affinity even in the conditions where
there was a breakdown. This might be due to the fact that giving quick feedback
can decrease uncertainty and promote positive affect, even when errors occur.
Additionally, the difference in and the direction of affinity between early
and late breakdown conditions could also be a result of a shift of the computer
from a ready-at-hand to a present-at-hand state, meaning that people do not
see the computer as a tool (ready-at-hand) until it commits an error, making
its tool status extremely salient (present-at-hand). Since affinity-seeking
was found to affect affinity but not politeness, it is possible to contend that
people are able to satisfy certain interpersonal needs through interactions
with computers.
Given that computers are not yet error free, the findings of the study are of importance in understanding the psychological and cognitive processes involved in encountering computer breakdowns while attempting to complete a task.
Media Effects Research Laboratory
306, James Building
University Park, PA 16801