Paper detail

Identifying synthetic voices qualities for conversational agents

The present study aims to explore user acceptance and perceptions toward different quality levels of synthetical voices. To achieve this, four voices have been exploited considering two main factors: the quality of the voices (low vs high) and their gender (male and female). 186 volunteers were recruited and subsequently allocated into four groups of different ages respec-tively, adolescents, young adults, middle-aged and seniors. After having randomly listened to each voice, participants were asked to fill the Virtual Agent Voice Acceptance Questionnaire (VAVAQ). Outcomes show that the two higher quality voices of Antonio and Giulia were more appreciated than the low-quality voices of Edoardo and Clara by the whole sample in terms of pragmatic, hedonic and attractiveness qualities attributed to the voices. Concerning preferences towards differently aged voices, it clearly appeared that they varied according to participants age' ranges examined. Furthermore, in terms of suitability to perform different tasks, participants considered Antonio and Giulia equally adapt for healthcare and front office jobs. Antonio was also judged to be significantly more qualified to accomplish protection and security tasks, while Edoardo was classified as the absolute least skilled in conducting household chores.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.