  Grice's Cooperative Principle (1975) describes the implicit maxims that guide
conversation between humans. As humans begin to interact with non-human
dialogue systems more frequently and in a broader scope, an important question
emerges: what principles govern those interactions? The present study addresses
this question by evaluating human-AI interactions using Grice's four maxims; we
demonstrate that humans do, indeed, apply these maxims to interactions with AI,
even making explicit references to the AI's performance through a Gricean lens.
Twenty-three participants interacted with an American English-speaking Alexa
and rated and discussed their experience with an in-lab researcher. Researchers
then reviewed each exchange, identifying those that might relate to Grice's
maxims: Quantity, Quality, Manner, and Relevance. Many instances of explicit
user frustration stemmed from violations of Grice's maxims. Quantity violations
were noted for too little but not too much information, while Quality
violations were rare, indicating trust in Alexa's responses. Manner violations
focused on speed and humanness. Relevance violations were the most frequent,
and they appear to be the most frustrating. While the maxims help describe many
of the issues participants encountered, other issues do not fit neatly into
Grice's framework. Participants were particularly averse to Alexa initiating
exchanges or making unsolicited suggestions. To address this gap, we propose
the addition of human Priority to describe human-AI interaction. Humans and AIs
are not conversational equals, and human initiative takes priority. We suggest
that the application of Grice's Cooperative Principles to human-AI interactions
is beneficial both from an AI development perspective and as a tool for
describing an emerging form of interaction.
