Conversations about end design

What we noticed in this case

Assumption: "How do we estimate the user's emotional state to change the flow of the conversation?"

→ "If the assumption is that the user agrees to the purpose and uses the command in advance, why not just educate the user on the emotional expression command?"

I found myself taking a step back in perspective.

1> Let's talk.

0> What would you like to see happen in this conversation?

1> I would like to think about how best to design the end of the conversation

0> Is there anything else you can tell us about that design?

1> Now that there is no design for the end, the dialogue continues to linger, which is not good!

0> What kind of endings are those?

1> When the user says, "I see! and when something strikes me, I want to end up fleshing it out, and when I'm in a mode where it's not working, I want to remind them of their purpose and get them back on the road.

0> Is there anything else about that user?

1> If I can observe the user's emotions, I'd like to change the way I talk to them, whether it's "I'm excited to discover something new" or "I'm getting annoyed that my questions don't stick well".

0> What type of user is this user?

1> The type of user who feels the value of verbalizing what cannot be verbalized.

0> How do you know the user?

1> I feel like I should specify in advance that that's the purpose.

0> Is there anything else you can tell us about its purpose?

1> If we clearly state "This is a system to elicit "I see"" in advance, and say "If you think "I see", please type "I see"", is there no need to presume it?

0> anything else about that advance?

1> I see this as stationery for intellectual production, and stationery increases the value you produce by learning how to use it beforehand.

0> How do you know its advance?

1> There's no way to know if the user has learned beforehand, and it's the user's responsibility not to learn, so you don't need to know.

0> Where is that advance located?

1> NGKW

0> Where is that user located?

1> Not restricted in location, can be used from a smartphone while traveling on a train.

0> Is there anything else about that phone?

1> This is another newly available stationery for intellectual production that mankind can use to increase productivity.

0> Is there anything else you can tell us about that stationery?

0> What do you value?

1> Stationery improves human intellectual productivity.

0> What is the relationship between that stationery and the user?

1> Stationery enhances users' intellectual productivity

0> Is that user the same as stationery? Is it different?

1> No, sir.

0> What happens to the stationery when the user

1> NG

0> What happens to the user when the stationery

1> NG

0> What is between the user and the stationery?

1> There is a learning cost. The value of stationery is demonstrated not only by the stationery as a thing, but also by paying the cost of learning it

0> How do you know its stationery?

1> NG

0> Where is that stationery located?

1> Bye-bye.

1> (In this case, the value creation was in the fact that I realized that I could take a step back and think, "If the user agrees with the purpose in advance, why don't I just educate the user on the emotional expression commands there?)

---