A Comparison of Avatar-, Video-, and Robot-Mediated Interaction on Users’ Trust in Expertise

Communication technologies are becoming increasingly diverse in form and functionality. A central concern is the ability to detect whether others are trustworthy. Judgments of trustworthiness rely, in part, on assessments of nonverbal cues, which are affected by media representations. In this research, we compared trust formation on three media representations. We presented 24 participants with advisors represented by two of three alternate formats: video, avatar, or robot. Unknown to the participants, one was an expert and the other was a non-expert. We observed participants' advice seeking behaviour under risk as an indicator of their trust in the advisor. We found that most participants preferred seeking advice from the expert, but we also found a tendency for seeking robot or video advice. Avatar advice, in contrast, was more rarely sought. Users' self-reports support these findings. These results suggest that when users make trust assessments the physical presence of the robot representation might compensate for the lack of identity cues.

[1]  Stina Matthiesen,et al.  Does Distance Still Matter? Revisiting the CSCW Fundamentals on Distributed Collaboration , 2014, TCHI.

[2]  John Marino,et al.  Avatar appearance & information credibility in Second Life® , 2011, iConference '11.

[3]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams , 2003, Organ. Sci..

[4]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Render me real? , 2012, ACM Trans. Graph..

[5]  Hao Li,et al.  Realtime performance-based facial animation , 2011, ACM Trans. Graph..

[6]  Jung P. Shim,et al.  Trust in videoconferencing , 2006, CACM.

[7]  Jodi Forlizzi,et al.  My agent as myself or another: effects on credibility and listening to advice , 2007, DPPI.

[8]  Mel Slater,et al.  Real time whole body motion mapping for avatars and robots , 2013, VRST '13.

[9]  Mel Slater,et al.  The impact of eye gaze on communication using humanoid avatars , 2001, CHI.

[10]  Kazuaki Tanaka,et al.  Comparing Video, Avatar, and Robot Mediated Communication: Pros and Cons of Embodiment , 2014, CollabTech.

[11]  Anthony Steed,et al.  Comparing flat and spherical displays in a trust scenario in avatar-mediated interaction , 2014, CHI.

[12]  Tetsuo Ono,et al.  Android as a telecommunication medium with a human-like presence , 2007, 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[13]  C. Nass,et al.  Are Machines Gender Neutral? Gender‐Stereotypic Responses to Computers With Voices , 1997 .

[14]  Shumin Zhai.  Editorial: TOCHI turns twenty , 2014, TCHI.

[15]  Daniel B. Horn,et al.  The effects of spatial and temporal video distortion on lie detection performance , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[16]  Ederyn Williams,et al.  Experimental comparisons of face-to-face and mediated communication: A review. , 1977 .

[17]  Wei Huang,et al.  Camera angle affects dominance in video-mediated communication , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[18]  Brian Scassellati,et al.  The Benefits of Interactions with Physically Present Robots over Video-Displayed Agents , 2011, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[19]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development , 2002, CHI.

[20]  Greg Welch,et al.  Animatronic Shader Lamps Avatars , 2009, ISMAR.

[21]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Anthropomorphic Interactions with a Robot and Robot–like Agent , 2008 .

[22]  Timothy W. Bickmore,et al.  DynamicDuo: Co-presenting with Virtual Agents , 2015, CHI.

[23]  John F. Canny,et al.  Multiview: improving trust in group video conferencing through spatial faithfulness , 2007, CHI.

[24]  Anthony Steed,et al.  Lie tracking: social presence, truth and deception in avatar-mediated telecommunication , 2010, CHI.

[25]  L. Felkins.  The Social Dilemmas , 2015 .

[26]  J. Bailenson,et al.  The Proteus Effect: The Effect of Transformed Self-Representation on Behavior , 2007 .

[27]  Jessica K. Hodgins,et al.  Using an Interactive Avatar's Facial Expressiveness to Increase Persuasiveness and Socialness , 2015, CHI.

[28]  Chris Bevan,et al.  Shaking Hands and Cooperation in Tele-present Human-Robot Negotiation , 2015, 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[29]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  In-body experiences: embodiment, control, and trust in robot-mediated communication , 2013, CHI.

[30]  Cameron Teoh,et al.  Investigating factors influencing trust in video-mediated communication , 2010, OZCHI '10.

[31]  Jens Riegelsberger,et al.  Rich Media, Poor Judgement? A Study of Media Effects on Users' Trust in Expertise , 2005, BCS HCI.

[32]  Hiroshi Ishiguro,et al.  Zoom cameras and movable displays enhance social telepresence , 2011, CHI.

[33]  C. Handy.  Trust and the virtual organization , 1999 .

[34]  H. Seidel,et al.  Pattern-aware Deformation Using Sliding Dockers , 2011, SIGGRAPH 2011.

[35]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  MeBot: a robotic platform for socially embodied presence , 2010, HRI.

[36]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Consistency in physical and on-screen action improves perceptions of telepresence robots , 2012, 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[37]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  The Uncanny Valley [From the Field] , 2012, IEEE Robotics Autom. Mag..

[38]  John C. Tang,et al.  To see or not to see: a study comparing four-way avatar, video, and audio conferencing for work , 2012, GROUP.

[39]  J. H. Davis,et al.  An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust , 1995 .

[40]  G. Bente,et al.  Avatar-Mediated Networking: Increasing Social Presence and Interpersonal Trust in Net-Based Collaborations , 2008 .

[41]  Jens Riegelsberger,et al.  The mechanics of trust: A framework for research and design , 2005, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[42]  Donald A. Norman.  THE WAY I SEE ITWaiting: a necessary part of life , 2008, INTR.

[43]  Yasushi Hirano,et al.  Reciprocal attentive communication in remote meeting with a humanoid robot , 2007, ICMI '07.