English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Technology companies have produced varied responses to concerns about theeffects of the design of their conversational AI systems. Some have claimedthat their voice assistants are in fact not gendered or human-like -- despitedesign features suggesting the contrary. We compare these claims to userperceptions by analysing the pronouns they use when referring to AI assistants.We also examine systems' responses and the extent to which they generate outputwhich is gendered and anthropomorphic. We find that, while some companiesappear to be addressing the ethical concerns raised, in some cases, theirclaims do not seem to hold true. In particular, our results show that systemoutputs are ambiguous as to the humanness of the systems, and that users tendto personify and gender them as a result.

Alexa, Google, Siri: What are Your Pronouns? Gender and Anthropomorphism in the Design and Perception of Conversational Assistants