Design and Evaluation of a Peripheral Robotic Conversation Companion

We present the design, implementation, and evaluation of a peripheral empathy-evoking robotic conversation companion, Kip1. The robot’s function is to increase people’s awareness to the effect of their behavior towards others, potentially leading to behavior change. Specifically, Kip1 is designed to promote nonaggressive conversation between people. It monitors theconversation’s nonverbal aspects and maintains an emotional model of its reaction to the conversation. If the conversation seems calm, Kip1 responds by a gesture designed to communicate curious interest. If the conversation seems aggressive, Kip1 responds by a gesture designed to communicate fear. We describe the design process of Kip1, guided by the principles of peripheral and evocative. We detail its hardware and software systems, and a study evaluating the effects of the robot’s autonomous behavior on couples’ conversations. We find support for our design goals. A conversation companion reacting to the conversation led to more gaze attention, but not more verbal distraction, compared to a robot that moves but does not react to the conversation. This suggests that robotic devices could be designed as companions tohuman-human interaction without compromising the natural communication flow between people. Participants also rated the reacting robot as having significantly more social human charactertraits and as being significantly more similar to them. This points to the robot’s potential to elicit people’s empathy.Categories and Subject Descriptors H.1.2 [Models and Principles]: User/Machine Systems; J.4 [Computer Applications]: Social and Behavioral Sciences— psychology. General Terms Experimentation, Human Factors.

[1]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Designing robots with movement in mind , 2014, Journal of Human-Robot Interaction.

[2]  J. Gottman,et al.  Marital interaction: physiological linkage and affective exchange. , 1983, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  J. Gottman,et al.  The topography of marital conflict: A sequential analysis of verbal and nonverbal behavior. , 1977 .

[4]  B R Karney,et al.  Neuroticism, marital interaction, and the trajectory of marital satisfaction. , 1997, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  Walter Bender,et al.  Influencing group participation with a shared display , 2004, CSCW.

[6]  Andrea Lockerd Thomaz,et al.  Secondary action in robot motion , 2010, 19th International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[7]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Robot Responsiveness to Human Disclosure Affects Social Impression and Appeal , 2014, 2014 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[8]  James Everett Young,et al.  Communicating affect via flight path Exploring use of the Laban Effort System for designing affective locomotion paths , 2013, 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[9]  Xiaotian Wang,et al.  Dynamic Emotion-Based Human-Robot Collaborative Assembly in Manufacturing : The Preliminary Concepts , 2014 .

[10]  Aryel Beck,et al.  Towards an Affect Space for robots to display emotional body language , 2010, 19th International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[11]  R. Cialdini,et al.  Online persuasion: An examination of gender differences in computer-mediated interpersonal influence. , 2002 .

[12]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms , 1997, CHI.

[13]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Radical atoms: beyond tangible bits, toward transformable materials , 2012, INTR.

[14]  C. Bartneck,et al.  In your face, robot! The influence of a character's embodiment on how users perceive its emotional expressions , 2004 .

[15]  Ingo Lütkebohle,et al.  The bielefeld anthropomorphic robot head “Flobi” , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[16]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Dumb robots, smart phones: A case study of music listening companionship , 2012, 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[17]  Oren Zuckerman,et al.  Objects for Change: A Case Study of a Tangible User Interface for Behavior Change , 2015, TEI.

[18]  Illah R. Nourbakhsh,et al.  A survey of socially interactive robots , 2003, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[19]  Stephanie Rosenthal,et al.  Designing robots for long-term social interaction , 2005, 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[20]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Robotic learning companions for early language development , 2013, ICMI '13.

[21]  P. Shaver,et al.  Emotion knowledge: further exploration of a prototype approach. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[22]  John M. Gottman,et al.  Predicting Marital Happiness and Stability from Newlywed Interactions , 1998 .

[23]  Karrie Karahalios,et al.  Social Mirrors as Social Signals: Transforming Audio into Graphics , 2009, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.