Child-robot interaction across cultures: How does playing a game with a social robot compare to playing a game alone or with a friend?

We examine the effect of culture (individualistic vs. collectivisitic) and age in child-robot interaction.8Years old children are more positive about their interaction with a robot than 12year old children.While interacting with a robot, Pakistani children are more expressive than Dutch ones.Children playing a game with a friend are more expressive than those playing with a robot.The factors culture, and age are crucial for designing better child-robot interactions. The present study investigates how children from two different cultural backgrounds (Pakistani, Dutch) and two different age groups (8 and 12year olds) experience interacting with a social robot (iCat) during collaborative game play. We propose a new method to evaluate children's interaction with such a robot, by asking whether playing a game with a state-of-the-art social robot like the iCat is more similar to playing this game alone or with a friend. A combination of self-report scores, perception test results and behavioral analyses indicate that child-robot interaction in game playing situations is highly appreciated by children, although more by Pakistani and younger children than by Dutch and older children. Results also suggest that children enjoyed playing with the robot more than playing alone, but enjoyed playing with a friend even more. In a similar vein, we found that children were more expressive in their non-verbal behavior when playing with the robot than when they were playing alone, but less expressive than when playing with a friend. Our results not only stress the importance of using new benchmarks for evaluating child-robot interaction but also highlight the significance of cultural differences for the design of social robots.

[1]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Designing sociable robots , 2002 .

[2]  T. Kanda,et al.  What People Assume about Robots: Cross-Cultural Analysis between Japan, Korea, and the USA , 2007 .

[3]  Ana Paiva,et al.  Affect recognition for interactive companions: challenges and design in real world scenarios , 2009, Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces.

[4]  Byron Reeves,et al.  Robots as New Media: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Social and Cognitive Responses to Robotic and On-Screen Agents , 2002 .

[5]  Katherine Isbister,et al.  Enabling Social Play: A Framework for Design and Evaluation , 2010, Evaluating User Experience in Games.

[6]  D. François Facilitating Play Between Children with Autism and an Autonomous Robot , 2009 .

[7]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  How people anthropomorphize robots , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[8]  François Michaud,et al.  How wild is wild? A taxonomy to characterize the ‘wildness’ of child-robot interaction , 2010, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[9]  Justin W. Hart,et al.  No fair!!: an interaction with a cheating robot , 2010, HRI 2010.

[10]  Sarah N. Woods,et al.  Exploring the design space of robots: Children's perspectives , 2006, Interact. Comput..

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

[12]  Larry D. Rosen,et al.  The psychological impact of technology from a global perspective , 1995 .

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

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

[15]  Myung-Suk Kim,et al.  SocialAttributesofRoboticProducts:Observations of Child-Robot Interactions in a School Environment , 2010 .

[16]  Batja Mesquita,et al.  The cultural psychology of emotion. , 2007 .

[17]  Changchun Liu,et al.  Online Affect Detection and Robot Behavior Adaptation for Intervention of Children With Autism , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[18]  Hillary Anger Elfenbein,et al.  Cross-cultural patterns in emotion recognition: highlighting design and analytical techniques. , 2002, Emotion.

[19]  R. W. Mitchell,et al.  The interpretation of animal psychology : Anthropomorphism or behavior reading ? , 1997 .

[20]  Yvonne de Kort,et al.  People, places, and play: player experience in a socio-spatial context , 2008, CIE.

[21]  T. Kanda,et al.  A cross-cultural study on attitudes towards robots , 2005 .

[22]  H. Triandis,et al.  Cultural influences on personality. , 2002, Annual review of psychology.

[23]  Sonya S. Kwak,et al.  Am I acceptable to you? Effect of a robot's verbal language forms on people's social distance from robots , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[24]  Yvonne de Kort,et al.  People, Places, and Play: A research framework for digital game experience in a socio-spatial context , 2007, DiGRA Conference.

[25]  François Michaud,et al.  Going into the wild in child–robot interaction studies: issues in social robotic development , 2008, Intell. Serv. Robotics.

[26]  D. Turner,et al.  Comparison of Children's Behavior toward Sony's Robotic Dog AIBO and a Real Dog: A Pilot Study , 2008 .

[27]  Jeonghye Han,et al.  Comparative Study on the Educational Use of Home Robots for Children , 2008, J. Inf. Process. Syst..

[28]  A. Kerepesi,et al.  Behavioural comparison of human–animal (dog) and human–robot (AIBO) interactions , 2006, Behavioural Processes.

[29]  Pei-Luen Patrick Rau,et al.  When in Rome: The role of culture & context in adherence to robot recommendations , 2010, 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[30]  Lidia Oshlyansky,et al.  Cultural models in HCI: Hofstede, affordance and technology acceptance , 2007 .

[31]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Robots as dogs?: children's interactions with the robotic dog AIBO and a live australian shepherd , 2005, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[32]  P. Ekman,et al.  Facial action coding system: a technique for the measurement of facial movement , 1978 .

[33]  Tatsuya Nomura,et al.  The Cross-cultural Acceptance of Tutoring Robots with Augmented Reality Services , 2009, J. Digit. Content Technol. its Appl..

[34]  Vanessa Evers,et al.  Relational vs. group self-construal: Untangling the role of national culture in HRI , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[35]  Tatsuya Nomura,et al.  The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots , 2006, AI & SOCIETY.

[36]  Scott Aubrey A Cross-Cultural Discussion of Japan and South Korea and How Differences Are Manifested in the ESL/EFL Classroom , 2009 .

[37]  Emiel Krahmer,et al.  Video-mediated and co-present gameplay: Effects of mutual gaze on game experience, expressiveness and perceived social presence , 2012, Interact. Comput..

[38]  Harry C. Triandis,et al.  Individualism-Collectivism , 1986 .

[39]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Design patterns for sociality in human-robot interaction , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[40]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Robotic pets in the lives of preschool children , 2004, CHI EA '04.

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

[42]  Janet C. Read,et al.  Validating the Fun Toolkit: an instrument for measuring children’s opinions of technology , 2008, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[43]  S. Kaiser,et al.  Situated emotional problem solving in interactive computer games 1 , 1996 .

[44]  Mark A. Neerincx,et al.  Children's responses and opinion on three bots that motivate, educate and play , 2008 .

[45]  K. Wada,et al.  Subjective evaluation of seal robot in Brunei , 2004, RO-MAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (IEEE Catalog No.04TH8759).

[46]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  What is a robot companion - friend, assistant or butler? , 2005, 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[47]  Valerie K. Sims,et al.  Go, Dog, Go: Maze Training AIBO vs. a Live Dog, An Exploratory Study , 2008 .

[48]  C. Saarni Children's Understanding of Display Rules for Expressive Behavior. , 1979 .

[49]  H. Kozima,et al.  Children-robot interaction: a pilot study in autism therapy. , 2007, Progress in brain research.