The document discusses the Media Equation theory proposed by Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass, which argues that people interact with and respond to media like computers, television, and new media as if they are interacting with real people. Reeves and Nass conducted 35 studies replacing people with media and found that individuals apply social and natural human responses even when interacting with media. Their theory suggests that the human brain evolved to treat anything exhibiting human-like behaviors as real. As such, media that communicate or act in human-like ways elicit social and natural responses from people.

1. The Media Equation
By
Byron Reeves & Clifford Nass
Presenter,
Wen Geng & Zaki Haider

2. “… individuals’
interactions with
computers, television,
and new media are
fundamentally social
and natural”
(Reeves & Nass, 1996, P. 5)
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places (p. 5). CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
• Cartoons. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://drawnbytom.com/cartoons
2:08 PM

3. • Lumière, A., & Lumière, L. (Directors). (1896). L'arrivée d'un train à La Ciotat [Motion picture]. France:. Lumière Brothers. As displayed in,
• Scorsese, M. (Director). (2011). Hugo [Motion picture]. U.S.A.: GK Films. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL_RR1iDA2k
Guess,
what happened
when the first motion
picture was shown in
a
Carnival in 1896
by the Lumière
Brothers?
2:08 PM

4. • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
• Cartoons. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://drawnbytom.com/cartoons
Who believes…
Media = Real Life
Children
Do not have the knowledge
Novices
Do not have the experience
Experts
think it is easier and efficient to accept
the metaphor
2:08 PM

5. • Nass, C., Steuer, J., Tauber, E., & Reeder, H. (1993, April). Anthropomorphism, agency, and ethopoeia: computers as social actors. InINTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference companion on Human
factors in computing systems (pp. 111-112). ACM.
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. (pp. 12) CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
• Cartoons. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://radiofreethinker.com
Reeves & Nass proposes,
Everyone believes
Media = Real Life
“The human brain evolved in a world in
which only humans exhibited rich social
behaviors, and a world in which all
received objects were real physical
objects.
Anything that seemed to be real person
or place was real.”
(Reeves & Nass, 1996, P. 12)
Computer (and Media) act as social actors.
(Nass et al. 1993)
2:08 PM

6. • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places (p. 11). CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
Step 1.
Find a well supported social
science research about
peoples’ interaction with other
people
Ex. People would react to other
people politely
Step 2.
Summarize the rule
Ex. People are polite to those
who ask questions about
themselves.
Step 3.
Replace person with media
Ex. People are polite to
computers that ask questions
about themselves.
Step 4.
Find how the social science
theory was tested
Ex. When someone asks your
opinion about themselves you
reply favorably; contrary to
when someone else asks you to
evaluate the same person
Step 5.
Recreate the experiment with
media
Ex. When a computer asks your
opinion about themselves you
reply favorably; contrary to
when another computer asks
you to evaluate the first
computer
Step 6.
Run it
Step 7.
Summarize
Ex. People are polite to
computers too
General Steps
Behind the experiments
2:08 PM

7. Politeness Experiment
• Nass, C., Steuer, J., Tauber, E., & Reeder, H. (1993, April). Anthropomorphism, agency, and ethopoeia: computers as social actors. InINTERACT'93 and CHI'93 conference companion on Human
factors in computing systems (pp. 111-112). ACM.
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places (p. 21). CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
Rule 1
“When a computer asks a user about itself; the user
will give more positive responses than when a
different computer asks the same questions.”
Rule 2
“Because people are less honest when a computer
asks about itself, the answers will be more
homogeneous than when a different computer asks
the same questions.”
(Reeves & Nass, 1996, P. 21)
Assumption
Based on CASA
Paradigm -
if the communication,
interaction, instruction
and turn taking of a
computer is close enough
to a human, and
“suggest social presence,
people will respond
accordingly.”
(Nass et al. 1993)
2:08 PM

8. Politeness Experiment
Person 1 provides statistics Person 1 enquires
about his performance
Respondent provides
Favorable response
Person 1 provides statistics Person 2 enquires
about Person 1’s
performance
Respondent provides
Less favorable response
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
?
?
2:08 PM

9. Politeness Experiment
Computer 1 provides statistics Computer 1 enquires
about its performance
Respondent provides
Favorable response
Computer 1 provides statistics Computer 2 enquires
about Computer 1’s
performance
Respondent provides
Less favorable response
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

10. • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
• Images. (n.d.). Retrieved November 23, 2015, from https://comm.stanford.edu
People respond to media as real,
even if they know
it isn't reasonable to do so.
Reeves & Nass started
a research project called
Social Responses to
Communication Technologies
At Stanford University
35 Studies were conducted
where media replaced
real people or environment
2:08 PM

11. Media & Manners
Interpersonal Distance
We evaluate intensely, pay more attention
to & remember pictures of people who
appear closer.
Flattery
We are gullible to get flattered by responses
from computers even when a praise is not
warranted.
Judging Others and Ourselves
A computer that criticizes others is
perceived as smarter and less likable.
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

12. Media & Personality
Personality of Characters
Important categories of
media personalities
(dominance/ submissive,
Friendly/ Unfriendly) are
readily recognizable by the
viewer.
Personality of Interfaces
People perceive computers
using dominant texts are
dominant (and vice versa)
and identify with the
computer with the similar
traits as themselves.
Imitating Personality
Dominant people prefer
computers that starts out
submissive and becomes
dominant (and vice versa) -
The rule of "what you gain is
better than what you had" (P.
105)
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

13. Media & Emotion
Good versus Bad
Good/Bad is a primary
evaluation. Human brain
processes good materials in
left hemisphere and bad
material in right hemisphere
Negativity
People do not like negative
media but pays more
attention to and remembers
the message it contains
Arousal
People respond by using same
dimensions of emotions –
valence and arousal – to
media content that they use
in real life.
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

14. Media & Social Roles
Specialists
Contents labelled as
‘specialist’ is perceived as
superior to the ‘generalist’
Teammates
People teamed up with a
computer will find similarity,
and provide - better
appraisal, cooperation,
agreement to the computer
Gender
People show gender
stereotyping attitude towards
computers depending on
male/female voice type
(Love-relationship vs technical
knowledge)
Voices
People assign individual voices
to individual social actors.
Source Orientation
Computers are the source of
information not the
programmers
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

15. Media & Form
Image Size
Larger pictures are more
arousing, better liked and
remembered
Fidelity
In case of audio high fidelity
gets remembered better
than low-fidelity contrary to
images where they get
evaluated similarly.
Synchrony
Audio-Video asynchrony
leads to negative evaluation
Motion
People provides more
attention to moving objects
and orients to visual surprise
Scene Changes
Visual cuts cause visual
orienting response.
Semantically related cuts are
less intrusive. Frequency and
amount of cuts impact
attention.
Subliminal Image
Judgement about media can
be influenced by subliminal
messages.
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

16. Summary of
Propositions
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.
▪ Everyone responds socially and
naturally to media
▪ Media are more similar than different
▪ The media equation is automatic
▪ Many different responses characterize
the media equation
▪ What seems true is more important
than what is true
▪ People respond to what is present
▪ People like simplicity
▪ Social and natural is easy
2:39 PM

17. ▪ Testability
▪ Simplicity
▪ Level of Agreement
▪ Purpose
▪ Understanding
▪ Stimulus
Evaluation
of the
Theory
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

18. • Bob and Beyond: A Microsoft Insider Remembers. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.technologizer.com/2010/03/29/bob-and-beyond-a-microsoft-insider-remembers/
• Koo, J., Kwac, J., Ju, W., Steinert, M., Leifer, L., & Nass, C. (2014). Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and
performance. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), 9(4), 269–275. http://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-014-0227-2
• Nass, C. (2004). Etiquette Equality: Exhibitions and Expectations of Computer Politeness. Communications of the ACM, 47(4), 35–37. http://doi.org/10.1145/975817.975841
• Takayama, L., & Nass, C. (2008). Driver Safety and Information from Afar: An Experimental Driving Simulator Study of Wireless vs. In-car Information Services. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud., 66(3),
173–184. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.06.005
Implication
& Further
Research
Microsoft BOB & Clippy
Both attempts received massive
critique and bad publicity to the
point that Microsoft revoked the
options in later versions.
Drivers’ response to Autonomous
Cars
Takayama & Nass (2008); Koo et al
(2014) provided design
recommendations for designing in-car
wireless systems. They found
respondents trust their in-car system but
takes more risks with it. Peoples’ emotion
and driving pattern can be influenced
by in-car system messages.
Media Equation in Different
Cultures
Nass (2004) tested media
equation in different countries
and cultures and found support
for the theory
2:08 PM

19. Variability in Interaction
Level of Different Media
Different medias offers varying degrees of
involvement in interaction. A television does
not provide the same level of interaction as
a artificial-intelligence embedded
computer interface. Reeves & Nass test
different types of responses using different
media, do not measure how much those
responses vary for different types of media.
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

20. Falsifiability &
causal model of
the theory
The analogy based on
'automatic response' of our
brain makes the Media
Equation Theory a post-positivist
theory.
we can never ascertain why people act the way they
act.
- Did they think of the media as a real person?
- Or, because they thought of the interaction as a
real conversation and due to habitual obligation
and norms associated with a conversation, they
were being polite?
- Or, did they establish a shared understanding over
the years of interaction with non-human sentient
animals that anything that can show signs of
sentience deserves the respect and politeness a
sentient individual deserves.
We do not know the answer to these questions - what
is the reality behind people's behavior in this way?
2:08 PM
• Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI Publications and Cambridge university press.

21. Thank You for listening
Any Questions?
Contact,
Wen Geng & Zaki Haider
For further questions
In Blackboard Discussion Board