Confederate effect

Term used to describe the phenomenon of a human considered a machine from their textual discourse (See: The Confederate Effect in Human Machine Textual Interaction: Shah & Henry, 2005) [1]. (Reverse of the Eliza Effect [2], when a machine is considered intelligent or human).

In the first Loebner Prize for Artificial Intelligence [3], in 1991, which deployed restricted conversational one-to-one Turing imitation games [4] (each interrogator chatting to one system at a time), a female ‘confederate’ or hidden-human, chatting on the topic of Shakespeare was considered too knowledgeable, hence considered a machine. The phenomenon was seen in the University of Surrey held 2003 Loebner Prize for Artificial Intelligence, when both hidden-humans, one male and one female, were each ranked as machine by at least one judge: Judge 7 and Judge 9 ranked the female ‘confederate 2’ as “1.00=definitely a machine”; the male ‘confederate 1’ was ranked “1.00=definitely a machine” by Judge 4 and Judge 9. [5] The gender of these two hidden-humans were incorrectly identified (male considered female; woman considered man) in independent transcript analysis ('gender-blurring' phenomenon, see Shah & Henry, 2005). [6]