Recently, an increasing number of safety organizations in the U.S. have incorporated text-based risk reporting systems to respond to safety incident reports from their community members. To gain a better understanding of the interaction between community members and dispatchers using text-based risk reporting systems, this study conducts a system log analysis of LiveSafe, a community safety reporting system, to provide empirical evidence of the conversational patterns between users and dispatchers using both quantitative and qualitative methods. We created an ontology to capture information (e.g., location, attacker, target, weapon, start-time, and end-time, etc.) that dispatchers often collected from users regarding their incident tips. Applying the proposed ontology, we found that dispatchers often asked users for different information across varied event types (e.g., Attacker for Abuse and Attack events, Target for Harassment events). Additionally, using emotion detection and regression analysis, we found an inconsistency in dispatchers' emotional support and responsiveness to users' messages between different organizations and between incident categories. The results also showed that users had a higher response rate and responded quicker when dispatchers provided emotional support. These novel findings brought significant insights to both practitioners and system designers, e.g., AI-based solutions to augment human agents' skills for improved service quality.
翻译:最近,美国越来越多的安全组织纳入了基于文本的风险报告系统,以应对社区成员的安全事故报告。为了更好地了解社区成员与调度者之间使用基于文本的风险报告系统的互动关系,本研究对LiveSafe(社区安全报告系统)进行了系统日志分析,以利用定量和定性方法提供用户与调度者之间对话模式的经验性证据。我们创建了一个本体学,以收集信息(例如,地点、攻击者、目标、武器、起始时间和结束时间等)发送者经常从用户那里收集的事件提示信息。应用拟议的本体学,我们发现,发送者常常要求用户提供不同类型事件(例如,虐待和攻击事件攻击者、骚扰事件目标)的不同信息。此外,利用情绪检测和回归分析,我们发现发送者在不同组织之间和事件类别之间对用户信息提供情感支持和反应不一致。结果还显示,用户在发送者提供情感支持时反应率更高,反应更快。应用拟议的本体学,我们发现,发送者常常要求用户提供不同类型不同类型(例如虐待和攻击事件攻击者攻击者、骚扰事件目标目标)的用户对用户的情感支持,以及基于事件类别的用户的系统改进后,其质量的解决方案带来了重要见解。