The Automaticity of Social Behavior towards Robots: The Influence of Cognitive Load on Interpersonal Distance to Approachable versus Less Approachable Robots

Social robots are designed to promote social responses by human users. Based on the Media Equation theory, we argue that the way in which people interact with technology resembles the way in which humans interact with other humans, and, crucially, that these social responses are mainly of an automatic nature. To investigate the automaticity of social behavior towards robots, the current study assessed a well-studied (in human-human interaction) social behavior: interpersonal distance people keep, though not from other humans but from a robot. Earlier research suggested that the social behavior of distance keeping depends (amongst others) on the bodily posture of the interaction partner. Based on these earlier studies, we expected that participants would keep an interpersonal distance dependent on the posture of their robotic interaction partner especially if a participant was responding in more automatic ways. We manipulated robot posture (approachable versus less approachable) and the cognitive load of the participant (high versus low), and measured user-robot approach distance in ten short interaction tasks. In line with expectations, results suggested that especially participants under high cognitive load approached the robot closer when its posture communicated approachableness than when it communicated less approachableness. Thereby, the current results suggested that especially when people are cognitively distracted, their behavior towards robots is of a social nature and comparable to their behavior when responding to other humans. Implications for theory, research and design of social robots are discussed.

[1]  Richard Bloss Your next surgeon may be a robot! , 2011, Ind. Robot.

[2]  D. Gilbert,et al.  On cognitive busyness: When person perceivers meet persons perceived. , 1988 .

[3]  Daniel M. Johnson,et al.  Experience as a moderator of the media equation: the impact of flattery and praise , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[4]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[5]  David Lee,et al.  The influence of subjects' personality traits on personal spatial zones in a human-robot interaction experiment , 2005, ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005..

[6]  Clifford Nass,et al.  The media equation - how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places , 1996 .

[7]  H. Plessner,et al.  Implicit consumer preferences and their influence on product choice , 2006 .

[8]  I. René J. A. te Boekhorst,et al.  Human approach distances to a mechanical-looking robot with different robot voice styles , 2008, RO-MAN 2008 - The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[9]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  Human-robot proxemics: Physical and psychological distancing in human-robot interaction , 2011, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[10]  T. Chartrand,et al.  THE UNBEARABLE AUTOMATICITY OF BEING , 1999 .

[11]  Jaap Ham,et al.  Making Robots Persuasive: The Influence of Combining Persuasive Strategies (Gazing and Gestures) by a Storytelling Robot on Its Persuasive Power , 2011, ICSR.

[12]  C. Nass,et al.  Machines and Mindlessness , 2000 .

[13]  A. Mehrabian Relationship of attitude to seated posture, orientation, and distance. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Jaap Ham,et al.  Investigating the media equation hypothesis: do we really see computer agents as human-like? , 2012 .

[15]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Silicon sycophants: the effects of computers that flatter , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[16]  Daniel M. Johnson,et al.  The media equation and team formation: Further evidence for experience as a moderator , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[17]  Daniel M. Johnson,et al.  Exploring mindlessness as an explanation for the media equation: a study of stereotyping in computer tutorials , 2009, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[18]  Leila Takayama,et al.  Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[19]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Automaticity and Consciousness , 2009 .

[20]  Eun-Ju Lee,et al.  What Triggers Social Responses to Flattering Computers? Experimental Tests of Anthropomorphism and Mindlessness Explanations , 2010, Commun. Res..

[21]  Chrystopher L. Nehaniv,et al.  An empirical framework for human-robot proxemics , 2009 .

[22]  E. Langer,et al.  Matters of mind: Mindfulness/mindlessness in perspective , 1992, Consciousness and Cognition.

[23]  C. Nass,et al.  Are People Polite to Computers? Responses to Computer-Based Interviewing Systems1 , 1999 .

[24]  Christopher A. Miller,et al.  Trust and etiquette in high-criticality automated systems , 2004, CACM.

[25]  Shuzhi Sam Ge,et al.  Design and development of Nancy, a social robot , 2011, 2011 8th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots and Ambient Intelligence (URAI).