Comparing Robot and Human guided Personalization: Adaptive Exercise Robots are Perceived as more Competent and Trustworthy

Learning and matching a user’s preference is an essential aspect of achieving a productive collaboration in long-term Human–Robot Interaction (HRI). However, there are different techniques on how to match the behavior of a robot to a user’s preference. The robot can be adaptable so that a user can change the robot’s behavior to one’s need, or the robot can be adaptive and autonomously tries to match its behavior to the user’s preference. Both types might decrease the gap between a user’s preference and the actual system behavior. However, the Level of Automation (LoA) of the robot is different between both methods. Either the user controls the interaction, or the robot is in control. We present a study on the effects of different LoAs of a Socially Assistive Robot (SAR) on a user’s evaluation of the system in an exercising scenario. We implemented an online preference learning system and a user-adaptable system. We conducted a between-subject design study ( adaptable robot vs.  adaptive robot) with 40 subjects and report our quantitative and qualitative results. The results show that users evaluate the adaptive robots as more competent, warm, and report a higher alliance. Moreover, this increased alliance is significantly mediated by the perceived competence of the system. This result provides empirical evidence for the relation between the LoA of a system, the user’s perceived competence of the system, and the perceived alliance with it. Additionally, we provide evidence for a proof-of-concept that the chosen preference learning method (i.e., Double Thompson Sampling (DTS)) is suitable for online HRI.

[1]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Would You Trust a (Faulty) Robot? Effects of Error, Task Type and Personality on Human-Robot Cooperation and Trust , 2015, 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[2]  Welch Bl THE GENERALIZATION OF ‘STUDENT'S’ PROBLEM WHEN SEVERAL DIFFERENT POPULATION VARLANCES ARE INVOLVED , 1947 .

[3]  Jerry M. Burger,et al.  Desire for Control: Personality, Social, and Clinical Perspectives , 1992 .

[4]  Thorsten Joachims,et al.  The K-armed Dueling Bandits Problem , 2012, COLT.

[5]  Juan Fasola,et al.  A socially assistive robot exercise coach for the elderly , 2013, J. Hum. Robot Interact..

[6]  Bruno Maisonnier,et al.  Choregraphe: a graphical tool for humanoid robot programming , 2009, RO-MAN 2009 - The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[7]  Sean Andrist,et al.  Look Like Me: Matching Robot Personality via Gaze to Increase Motivation , 2015, CHI.

[8]  Pei-Luen Patrick Rau,et al.  Effects of a Social Robot's Autonomy and Group Orientation on Human Decision-Making , 2013, Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Matthias Schneider-Hufschmidt,et al.  Adaptive User Interfaces: Principles and Practice , 1993 .

[10]  Alan R. Wagner,et al.  Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios , 2016, 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[11]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Tell me more designing HRI to encourage more trust, disclosure, and companionship , 2016, 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[12]  Ning Wang,et al.  Trust calibration within a human-robot team: Comparing automatically generated explanations , 2016, 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[13]  Tobias Baur,et al.  Adapting a Robot's linguistic style based on socially-aware reinforcement learning , 2017, 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[14]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Can computers be teammates? , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  Franz Kummert,et al.  Exercising with a humanoid companion is more effective than exercising alone , 2016, 2016 IEEE-RAS 16th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids).

[16]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[17]  Timothy W. Bickmore,et al.  Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships , 2005, TCHI.

[18]  R. Rhodes,et al.  Personality correlates of physical activity: a review and meta-analysis , 2006, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[19]  Maya Cakmak,et al.  Designing Interactions for Robot Active Learners , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development.

[20]  Adriana Tapus,et al.  User—robot personality matching and assistive robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy , 2008, Intell. Serv. Robotics.

[21]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Human and Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators , 1978 .

[22]  S. Kopp,et al.  Towards Adaptive Social Behavior Generation for Assistive Robots Using Reinforcement Learning , 2017, 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.

[23]  Ana Paiva,et al.  Social Robots for Long-Term Interaction: A Survey , 2013, International Journal of Social Robotics.

[24]  N. Epley,et al.  The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle , 2014 .

[25]  Pierre Blazevic,et al.  The NAO humanoid: a combination of performance and affordability , 2008, ArXiv.

[26]  Bert Arnrich,et al.  Socially assistive child-robot interaction in physical exercise coaching , 2017, 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[27]  F. Wilcoxon Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[28]  Tatsuya Nomura,et al.  Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human–robot interaction , 2006, AI & SOCIETY.

[29]  Deborah Kendzierski,et al.  Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale: Two Validation Studies , 1991 .

[30]  Franz Kummert,et al.  A framework for designing socially assistive robot interactions , 2017, Cognitive Systems Research.

[31]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Robots at home: Understanding long-term human-robot interaction , 2008, 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[32]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[33]  Laurel D. Riek,et al.  Wizard of Oz studies in HRI , 2012, J. Hum. Robot Interact..

[34]  Brian Scassellati,et al.  Personalizing Robot Tutors to Individuals’ Learning Differences , 2014, 2014 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[35]  B. L. Welch The generalisation of student's problems when several different population variances are involved. , 1947, Biometrika.

[36]  Huasen Wu,et al.  Double Thompson Sampling for Dueling Bandits , 2016, NIPS.

[37]  Jessie Y. C. Chen,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Factors Affecting Trust in Human-Robot Interaction , 2011, Hum. Factors.

[38]  Steven J. Stroessner,et al.  The Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS): Development and Validation , 2017, 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.

[39]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[40]  Ana Paiva,et al.  Modelling Empathy in Social Robotic Companions , 2011, UMAP Workshops.

[41]  Jenay M. Beer,et al.  Toward a framework for levels of robot autonomy in human-robot interaction , 2014, Journal of human-robot interaction.

[42]  M.J. Mataric,et al.  Hands-off assistive robotics for post-stroke arm rehabilitation , 2005, 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005. ICORR 2005..

[43]  Daniel J. McAllister Affect- and Cognition-Based Trust as Foundations for Interpersonal Cooperation in Organizations , 1995 .

[44]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. , 2007, Psychological review.

[45]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Adapting Robot Behavior for Human--Robot Interaction , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[46]  Eyke Hüllermeier,et al.  Preference Learning: An Introduction , 2010, Preference Learning.

[47]  Fillia Makedon,et al.  An Interactive Learning and Adaptation Framework for Adaptive Robot Assisted Therapy , 2016, PETRA.

[48]  Franz Kummert,et al.  Exploring embodiment and dueling bandit learning for preference adaptation in human-robot interaction , 2017, 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[49]  A. Horvath,et al.  Development and validation of the Working Alliance Inventory. , 1989 .

[50]  Peter Norvig,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 1995 .

[51]  L. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[52]  Hiroshi Nakagawa,et al.  Regret Lower Bound and Optimal Algorithm in Dueling Bandit Problem , 2015, COLT.