Spatial and Other Social Engagement Cues in a Child-Robot Interaction: Effects of a Sidekick

In this study, we explored the impact of a co-located sidekick on child-robot interaction. We examined child behaviors while interacting with an expressive furniture robot and his robot lamp sidekick. The results showed that the presence of a sidekick did not alter child proximity, but did increase attention to spoken elements of the interaction. This suggests the addition of a co-located sidekick has potential to increase engagement but may not alter subtle physical interactions associated with personal space and group spatial arrangements. The findings also reinforce existing research by the community on proxemics and anthropomorphism.

[1]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  The development of personal space: Proxemic behavior of children 6 through 16 , 1974 .

[2]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Interactive Robots as Social Partners and Peer Tutors for Children: A Field Trial , 2004, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[3]  Tetsuo Ono,et al.  Multi-robot cooperation for human-robot communication , 2002, Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[4]  Michio Okada,et al.  STB: Child-Dependent Sociable Trash Box , 2011, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[5]  A. Kendon.  Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters , 1990 .

[6]  David McNeill,et al.  Gesture, Gaze, and Ground , 2005, MLMI.

[7]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Robot Manzai: Robot Conversation as a Passive-Social Medium , 2008, Int. J. Humanoid Robotics.

[8]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Spatial Formation Model for Initiating Conversation , 2011, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[9]  Timothy V. Schafer.  Better Game Characters by Design: A Psychological Approach , 2006 .

[10]  Vittorio Murino,et al.  Towards Computational Proxemics: Inferring Social Relations from Interpersonal Distances , 2011, 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2011 IEEE Third Int'l Conference on Social Computing.

[11]  Peter Wittenburg,et al.  Annotation by Category: ELAN and ISO DCR , 2008, LREC.

[12]  Anders Green,et al.  Investigating Spatial Relationships in Human-Robot Interaction , 2006, 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[13]  Andrew Zisserman,et al.  Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision: N-View Geometry , 2004 .

[14]  Leslie A. Hayduk,et al.  The shape of personal space: An experimental investigation. , 1981 .

[15]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Robot Manzai - robots' conversation as a passive social medium , 2005, 5th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, 2005..

[16]  Brian Scassellati,et al.  The Oz of Wizard: Simulating the human for interaction research , 2009, 2009 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[17]  K. G. Bailey,et al.  Modeling and Personal Space Behavior in Children , 1973 .

[18]  Candace L. Sidner,et al.  Recognizing engagement in human-robot interaction , 2010, HRI 2010.

[19]  Chrystopher L. Nehaniv,et al.  Sustaining interaction dynamics and engagement in dyadic child-robot interaction kinesics: lessons learnt from an exploratory study , 2005, ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005..

[20]  Marek P. Michalowski,et al.  A spatial model of engagement for a social robot , 2006, 9th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, 2006..

[21]  Roger Carlson,et al.  The development of personal space in primary school children , 1979 .

[22]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Interactive Humanoid Robots for a Science Museum , 2007, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[23]  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).

[24]  Mark R. Lepper,et al.  Individual consistency in the proxemic behavior of preschool children. , 1975 .

[25]  Morana Alac,et al.  Fumihide Tanaka engagement in the practice of social robotics When a robot is social : Spatial arrangements and multimodal semiotic , 2011 .

[26]  T. V. Oosterhout,et al.  A visual method for robot proxemics measurements , 2008 .

[27]  F. Thomas,et al.  The illusion of life : Disney animation , 1981 .

[28]  KandaTakayuki,et al.  Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children , 2004 .

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

[30]  David Lee,et al.  Close encounters: spatial distances between people and a robot of mechanistic appearance , 2005, 5th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, 2005..

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

[32]  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..

[33]  Hirotaka Osawa,et al.  Maintaining learning motivation of older people by combining household appliance with a communication robot , 2010, 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[34]  Bernhard P. Wrobel,et al.  Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision , 2001 .

[35]  H. Kuzuoka,et al.  Reconfiguring spatial formation arrangement by robot body orientation , 2010, HRI 2010.

[36]  Chrystopher L. Nehaniv,et al.  A study of a single robot interacting with groups of children in a rotation game scenario , 2005, 2005 International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation.

[37]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  An Experimental Study of the Use of Multiple Humanoid Robots as a Social Communication Medium , 2011, HCI.

[38]  F. Thomas,et al.  Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life , 1981 .

[39]  Jacob Lomranz,et al.  Children's Personal Space as a Function of Age and Sex. , 1975 .