# The influence of human agency beliefs on ascribing gaze-signalled communicative intent

## TL;DR

People are more likely to see gaze as communication if they believe an artificial agent is human-controlled rather than AI-controlled.

## Contribution

This study reveals how beliefs about an agent's sentience influence the interpretation of ambiguous gaze cues in artificial agents.

## Key findings

- Participants ascribed more communicative intent to human-controlled agents during ambiguous gaze cues.
- Subjective ratings showed a general preference for human-controlled over AI-controlled agents.
- Eye contact and repeated gaze at objects influenced perceptions of communicative intent.

## Abstract

Communication with artificial agents, such as virtual characters and social robots, is becoming more prevalent, making it crucial to understand how their behaviours can best support social interaction. Eye gaze is a key communicative behaviour, as it signals attention and intentions. Prior research shows that perceiving an agent as sentient affects how its gaze is interpreted. This study examined how such beliefs affect the interpretation of gaze as a signal of communicative intent. In a semi-interactive online task, 160 participants viewed a virtual agent exhibiting dynamic gaze sequences. Each trial varied whether eye contact occurred and whether the agent looked at the same object twice. Participants judged whether the agent was requesting help or merely inspecting the object. Beliefs about the agent’s sentience (human- or AI-controlled) were also manipulated. Results showed that when gaze cues were ambiguous, participants were more likely to ascribe communicative intent if they believed the agent was human-controlled compared to when they believed the agent was AI-controlled. Subjective ratings also indicated a general preference for human-controlled agents. These findings underscore the influence of user expectations on interpreting gaze in artificial agents.