How does telenoid affect the communication between children in classroom setting?

It needs to be investigated how humanoid robots may affect people in the real world when they are employed to express the presence, a feel of being there, in tele-communication. We brought Telenoid, a tele-operated humanoid robot, into a classroom at an elementary school to see how schoolchildren respond to it. Our study is exploratory and we focused on the social aspects that might facilitate communication between schoolchildren. We found that Telenoid affected the way children work as group. They participated in the group work more positively, became more spontaneous, and differentiated their roles. We observed that Telenoid's limited capability led them to change their attitudes so that they could work together. The result suggests that the limited functionality may facilitate cooperation among participants in classroom setting.

[1]  Shuichi Nishio,et al.  Exploring the Natural Reaction of Young and Aged Person with Telenoid in a Real World , 2011, J. Adv. Comput. Intell. Intell. Informatics.

[2]  Fumihide Tanaka,et al.  Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Deborah I. Fels,et al.  Video-mediated communication in the classroom to support sick children: a case study , 2001 .

[4]  Leila Takayama,et al.  "Now, i have a body": uses and social norms for mobile remote presence in the workplace , 2011, CHI.

[5]  Jeonghye Han.  Robot-Aided Learning and r-Learning Services , 2010 .

[6]  Hiroshi Ishiguro,et al.  Toward social mechanisms of android science: A CogSci 2005 Workshop: 25 and 26 July 2005, Stresa, Italy , 2006 .

[7]  James D. Hollan,et al.  Beyond being there , 1992, CHI.

[8]  M. Cole,et al.  Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. L. S. Vygotsky. , 1978 .

[9]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  Speech patterns in video-mediated conversations , 1992, CHI.

[10]  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..

[11]  K. Lewin.  Field theory in social science , 1951 .

[12]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Human-Robot Interaction: A Survey , 2008, Found. Trends Hum. Comput. Interact..

[13]  K. Dautenhahn,et al.  Comparing human robot interaction scenarios using live and video based methods: towards a novel methodological approach , 2006, 9th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, 2006..

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

[15]  Osamu Morikawa,et al.  The Sense of Togetherness in HyperMirror : an Explanation using Cognitive Modes , 2004 .

[16]  Christer Carlsson,et al.  A space based model for user interaction in shared synthetic environments , 1993, INTERCHI.

[17]  A. Green,et al.  Applying the Wizard-of-Oz framework to cooperative service discovery and configuration , 2004, RO-MAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (IEEE Catalog No.04TH8759).

[18]  Masahiko Inami,et al.  RobotPHONE: RUI for interpersonal communication , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[19]  M. Merleau-Ponty.  Phénoménologie de la perception , 1950 .

[20]  Takashi Minato,et al.  Development of an Android Robot for Studying Human-Robot Interaction , 2004, IEA/AIE.

[21]  H. Ishiguro,et al.  CAN A TELEOPERATED ANDROID REPRESENT PERSONAL PRESENCE? - A CASE STUDY WITH CHILDREN , 2007 .

[22]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .