Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Mori's Uncanny Valley Hypothesis1,2 proposes that the perception of humanlike characters such as robots and, by extension, avatars (computer-generated characters) can evoke negative or positive affect (valence) depending on the object's degree of visual and behavioral realism along a dimension of human likeness (DHL) (Figure 1). But studies of affective valence of subjective responses to variously realistic non-human characters have produced inconsistent findings 3, 4, 5, 6. One of a number of reasons for this is that human likeness is not perceived as the hypothesis assumes. While the DHL can be defined following Mori's description as a smooth linear change in the degree of physical humanlike similarity, subjective perception of objects along the DHL can be understood in terms of the psychological effects of categorical perception (CP) 7. Further behavioral and neuroimaging investigations of category processing and CP along the DHL and of the potential influence of the dimension's underlying category structure on affective experience are needed. This protocol therefore focuses on the DHL and allows examination of CP. Based on the protocol presented in the video as an example, issues surrounding the methodology in the protocol and the use in "uncanny" research of stimuli drawn from morph continua to represent the DHL are discussed in the article that accompanies the video. The use of neuroimaging and morph stimuli to represent the DHL in order to disentangle brain regions neurally responsive to physical human-like similarity from those responsive to category change and category processing is briefly illustrated.

[1]  M. Press Presence : teleoperators and virtual environments. , 2014 .

[2]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  The Uncanny Valley [From the Field] , 2012, IEEE Robotics Autom. Mag..

[3]  Mark Grimshaw,et al.  The Uncanny Wall , 2011, Int. J. Arts Technol..

[4]  L. Jäncke,et al.  Human Neuroscience , 2022 .

[5]  T. Wheatley,et al.  The Tipping Point of Animacy , 2010, Psychological science.

[6]  Jiye G. Kim,et al.  Erratum to “Adaptation in the fusiform face area (FFA): Image or Person?” [Vision Research 49 (23) (2009) 2800–2807] , 2010, Vision Research.

[7]  Carol A. Seger,et al.  Category learning in the brain. , 2010, Annual review of neuroscience.

[8]  P. Whalen,et al.  The Primacy of Negative Interpretations When Resolving the Valence of Ambiguous Facial Expressions , 2010, Psychological science.

[9]  Peter Indefrey,et al.  Formation of Category Representations in Superior Temporal Sulcus , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  Erik J. Peterson,et al.  Dissociating the contributions of independent corticostriatal systems to visual categorization learning through the use of reinforcement learning modeling and Granger causality modeling , 2010, NeuroImage.

[11]  M Zacksenhouse,et al.  Robust versus optimal strategies for two-alternative forced choice tasks. , 2010, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[12]  P. Glimcher,et al.  Title: the Neural Representation of Subjective Value under Risk and Ambiguity 1 2 , 2009 .

[13]  Jiye G. Kim,et al.  Adaptation in the fusiform face area (FFA): Image or person? , 2009, Vision Research.

[14]  R. Goebel,et al.  Neural correlates of shape and surface reflectance information in individual faces , 2009, Neuroscience.

[15]  Angela Tinwell Uncanny as Usability Obstacle , 2009, HCI.

[16]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[17]  Daniel B Wright,et al.  Functions for traditional and multilevel approaches to signal detection theory , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[18]  Claude Bonnet,et al.  Reaction times as a measure of uncertainty. , 2008, Psicothema.

[19]  Andrew D. Engell,et al.  The role of the amygdala in implicit evaluation of emotionally neutral faces. , 2008, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[20]  Jane E. Joseph,et al.  Mid-fusiform Activation during Object Discrimination Reflects the Process of Differentiating Structural Descriptions , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[21]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  The neural systems that mediate human perceptual decision making , 2008, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[22]  Jules Davidoff,et al.  Face Familiarity, Distinctiveness, and Categorical Perception , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Human emotion and the uncanny valley: A GLM, MDS, and Isomap analysis of robot video ratings , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[24]  Jun'ichiro Seyama,et al.  The Uncanny Valley: Effect of Realism on the Impression of Artificial Human Faces , 2007, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[25]  Hugo D. Critchley,et al.  Interoceptive Basis to Craving , 2007, Neuron.

[26]  M. Riesenhuber,et al.  Categorization Training Results in Shape- and Category-Selective Human Neural Plasticity , 2007, Neuron.

[27]  Lutz Jäncke,et al.  Neural correlates of a ‘pessimistic’ attitude when anticipating events of unknown emotional valence , 2007, NeuroImage.

[28]  Yifan Wang,et al.  Exploring the Uncanny Valley with Japanese Video Game Characters , 2007, DiGRA Conference.

[29]  Heloir,et al.  The Uncanny Valley , 2019, The Animation Studies Reader.

[30]  H. Ishiguro,et al.  The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research , 2006 .

[31]  Caren M. Rotello,et al.  Measures of sensitivity based on a single hit rate and false alarm rate: The accuracy, precision, and robustness of′,Az, andA’ , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  M. Riesenhuber,et al.  Evaluation of a Shape-Based Model of Human Face Discrimination Using fMRI and Behavioral Techniques , 2006, Neuron.

[33]  J. Hirsch,et al.  A Neural Representation of Categorization Uncertainty in the Human Brain , 2006, Neuron.

[34]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[35]  David Hanson Exploring the Aesthetic Range for Humanoid Robots , 2006 .

[36]  Joseph E LeDoux,et al.  Contributions of the Amygdala to Emotion Processing: From Animal Models to Human Behavior , 2005, Neuron.

[37]  Andrew Olney,et al.  Upending the Uncanny Valley , 2005, AAAI.

[38]  M. Shadlen,et al.  The effect of stimulus strength on the speed and accuracy of a perceptual decision. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[39]  Carol A. Seger,et al.  The Roles of the Caudate Nucleus in Human Classification Learning , 2005, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[40]  W Todd Maddox,et al.  Information-integration category learning in patients with striatal dysfunction. , 2005, Neuropsychology.

[41]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Androids as an Experimental Apparatus: Why Is There an Uncanny Valley and Can We Exploit It? , 2005 .

[42]  A. Treves,et al.  Morphing Marilyn into Maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[43]  R. Poldrack,et al.  How do memory systems interact? Evidence from human classification learning , 2004, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[44]  K. Luan Phan,et al.  Valence, gender, and lateralization of functional brain anatomy in emotion: a meta-analysis of findings from neuroimaging , 2003, NeuroImage.

[45]  D. Yves von Cramon,et al.  Predicting events of varying probability: uncertainty investigated by fMRI , 2003, NeuroImage.

[46]  R. Henson Neuroimaging studies of priming , 2003, Progress in Neurobiology.

[47]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  Categorical perception of familiar objects , 2002, Cognition.

[48]  S. Campanella,et al.  Categorical Perception of Happiness and Fear Facial Expressions: An ERP Study , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[49]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  fMR-adaptation: a tool for studying the functional properties of human cortical neurons. , 2001, Acta psychologica.

[50]  A. Chrysochoos,et al.  Categorical perception of facial gender information: Behavioural evidence and the face-space metaphor , 2001 .

[51]  D. Levin Race as a visual feature: using visual search and perceptual discrimination tasks to understand face categories and the cross-race recognition deficit. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[52]  C. Macrae,et al.  Social cognition: thinking categorically about others. , 2000, Annual review of psychology.

[53]  Carol A. Seger,et al.  Striatal activation during acquisition of a cognitive skill. , 1999, Neuropsychology.

[54]  R D Sorkin,et al.  Spreadsheet signal detection , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[55]  H Stanislaw,et al.  Calculation of signal detection theory measures , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[56]  P. Benson,et al.  Are faces of different species perceived categorically by human observers? , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[57]  Philip J. Benson,et al.  Categorical Perception of Facial Expressions: Categories and their Internal Structure , 1997 .

[58]  D. Perrett,et al.  Categorical Perception of Morphed Facial Expressions , 1996 .

[59]  F. Keil,et al.  Categorical effects in the perception of faces , 1995, Cognition.

[60]  W. Donaldson,et al.  Accuracy of d′ and A′ as estimates of sensitivity , 1993 .

[61]  Gideon Keren,et al.  A Handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences : methodological issues , 1993 .

[62]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Signal detection theory as data analysis method and psychological decision model , 1993 .

[63]  John J. Magee,et al.  Categorical perception of facial expressions , 1992, Cognition.

[64]  W. Donaldson Measuring recognition memory. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[65]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[66]  S. Harnad Categorical Perception: The Groundwork of Cognition , 1990 .

[67]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Resolution for speech sounds: basic sensitivity and context memory on vowel and consonant continua , 1988 .

[68]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: applications to dementia and amnesia. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[69]  J A Swets,et al.  Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: implications for theory and measurement of performance. , 1986, Psychological bulletin.

[70]  B. Farell,et al.  Same-different judgments: a review of current controversies in perceptual comparisons. , 1985, Psychological bulletin.

[71]  Gail Levy-Berger,et al.  Human Experimental Psychology , 1985 .

[72]  B. Repp Categorical Perception: Issues, Methods, Findings , 1984 .

[73]  Dominic W. Massaro,et al.  Categorical or continuous speech perception: A new test , 1983, Speech Commun..

[74]  Norman J. Lass,et al.  Speech and Language: Advances in Basic Research and Practice , 1979 .

[75]  Wayne A. Wickelgren,et al.  Speed-accuracy tradeoff and information processing dynamics , 1977 .

[76]  J. Grier,et al.  Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: computing formulas. , 1971, Psychological bulletin.

[77]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  Theoretical notes. Motor theory of speech perception: a reply to Lane's critical review. , 1970, Psychological review.

[78]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  A non-parametric analysis of recognition experiments , 1964 .

[79]  B. C. Griffith,et al.  The discrimination of speech sounds within and across phoneme boundaries. , 1957, Journal of experimental psychology.

[80]  R. Hyman Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[81]  J. Gaddum Probit Analysis , 1948, Nature.