Observer Perception of Dominance and Mirroring Behavior in Human-Robot Relationships

How people view relationships between humans and robots is an important consideration for the design and acceptance of social robots. Two studies investigated the effect of relational behavior in a human-robot dyad. In Study 1, participants watched videos of a human confederate discussing the Desert Survival Task with either another human confederate or a humanoid robot. Participants were less trusting of both the robot and the person in a human-robot relationship where the robot was dominant toward the person than when the person was dominant toward the robot; these differences were not found for a human pair. In Study 2, participants watched videos of a human confederate having an everyday conversation with either another human confederate or a humanoid robot. Participants who saw a confederate mirror the gestures of a robot found the robot less attractive than when the robot mirrored the confederate; the opposite effect was found for a human pair. Exploratory findings suggest that human-robot relationships are viewed differently than human dyads. Categories and Subject Descriptors H.1.2 [Models and Principles]: User/Machine Systems - human factors, software psychology General Terms Design, Human Factors

[1]  Jaap Ham,et al.  The Dominant Robot: Threatening Robots Cause Psychological Reactance, Especially When They Have Incongruent Goals , 2010, PERSUASIVE.

[2]  D. Solomon,et al.  Structuring the concept of relational communication , 1999 .

[3]  A. Kendon.  Movement coordination in social interaction: some examples described. , 1970, Acta psychologica.

[4]  L. Tiedens,et al.  An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[5]  C. Heyes,et al.  Robotic movement elicits automatic imitation. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[6]  T. Chartrand,et al.  The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  Mark H. Chignell,et al.  Communication of Emotion in Social Robots through Simple Head and Arm Movements , 2011, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

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

[9]  M. LaFrance.  Nonverbal synchrony and rapport: Analysis by the cross-lag panel technique. , 1979 .

[10]  Emily S. Cross,et al.  Robotic movement preferentially engages the action observation network , 2012, Human brain mapping.

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

[12]  Julie A. Shah,et al.  Decision-making authority, team efficiency and human worker satisfaction in mixed human–robot teams , 2015, Auton. Robots.

[13]  Peter Robinson,et al.  When my robot smiles at me Enabling human-robot rapport via real-time head gesture mimicry , 2009 .

[14]  Vittorio Gallese,et al.  Mirror Neurons and the Evolution of Brain and Language , 2002 .

[15]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[16]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Is a Robot better than Video for Initiating Remote Social Connections among Children , 2014 .

[17]  Frank J. Bernieri,et al.  Dyad rapport and the accuracy of its judgment across situations: A lens model analysis. , 1996 .

[18]  A. Scheflen.  THE SIGNIFICANCE OF POSTURE IN COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS. , 1964, Psychiatry.

[19]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  The nature and measurement of interpersonal dominance , 1998 .

[20]  Batya Friedman,et al.  Hardware companions?: what online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship , 2003, CHI '03.

[21]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Critic, compatriot, or chump?: Responses to robot blame attribution , 2010, 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

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

[23]  Kory Floyd,et al.  Relational Message Interpretations of Nonverbal Matching Behavior: An Application of the Social Meaning Model , 2003, The Journal of social psychology.

[24]  Christian Keysers,et al.  The anthropomorphic brain: The mirror neuron system responds to human and robotic actions , 2007, NeuroImage.

[25]  H. Rosenfeld,et al.  The effect of postural lean and body congruence on the judgment of psychotherapeutic rapport , 1980 .

[26]  Fey Parrill,et al.  Seeing and Hearing Double: The Influence of Mimicry in Speech and Gesture on Observers , 2006 .

[27]  Roger Feltman,et al.  The influence of red on perceptions of relative dominance and threat in a competitive context. , 2011, Journal of sport & exercise psychology.

[28]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  A Storytelling Robot: Modeling and Evaluation of Human-like Gaze Behavior , 2006, 2006 6th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots.

[29]  Norah E. Dunbar,et al.  An interactionist perspective on dominance‐submission: Interpersonal dominance as a dynamic, situationally contingent social skill , 2000 .

[30]  T. Chartrand,et al.  Using Nonconscious Behavioral Mimicry to Create Affiliation and Rapport , 2003, Psychological science.

[31]  George A. Bekey,et al.  On autonomous robots , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[32]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Can computer personalities be human personalities? , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[33]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Applying a social meaning model to relational message interpretations of conversational involvement: Comparing observer and participant perspectives , 1991 .

[34]  Marianne LaFrance,et al.  Group Rapport: Posture Sharing as a Nonverbal Indicator , 1976 .

[35]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Nonverbal cues and interpersonal judgments: Participant and observer perceptions of intimacy, dominance, composure, and formality , 1999 .

[36]  R. A. Hill,et al.  ATTRIBUTION TO RED SUGGESTS SPECIAL ROLE IN DOMINANCE SIGNALLING , 2007 .

[37]  鈴木 聡.  Media Equation 研究の背景と動向 , 2011 .

[38]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Whose job is it anyway? a study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task , 2004 .

[39]  Jerold L. Hale,et al.  The fundamental topoi of relational communication , 1984 .

[40]  C. Nass,et al.  Are Machines Gender Neutral? Gender‐Stereotypic Responses to Computers With Voices , 1997 .

[41]  M. LaFrance.  Postural Mirroring and Intergroup Relations , 1985 .

[42]  J. Bailenson,et al.  Digital Chameleons , 2005, Psychological science.

[43]  D. Byrne.  The Attraction Paradigm , 1971 .

[44]  I. René J. A. te Boekhorst,et al.  Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion , 2008, Auton. Robots.

[45]  W. S. Condon,et al.  A segmentation of behavior , 1967 .

[46]  S. Boker,et al.  Symmetry Building and Symmetry Breaking in Synchronized Movement , 2001 .

[47]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Experiments with a robotic computer: Body, affect and cognition interactions , 2007, 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).