Sociable robots : the role of presence and task in human-robot interaction

Human-robot interaction is an emerging area of study that is developing an understanding of how to build robots that are useful and effective in helping people perform tasks in particular domains. In particular, social robots, or those that help people as capable partners rather than as tools, are believed to be of greatest use for applications in entertainment, education, and healthcare because of their potential to be perceived as trusting, helpful, reliable, and engaging. This thesis explores how the robot’s physical presence and proximity to a person influence a person’s perception of these characteristics. Results from two experiments are reported: the first shows differences in participant responses to a robot, an animated character, and a human and the second shows the outcome of participants interacting with a robot or a robot presented on a television in two different types of tasks. Responses to the interactions were collected via questionnaire and videotape and are reported on scales measuring trust, perceived information quality, altruism, level of engagement, reliability, immediacy, credibility, and persuasiveness. The results of this research will contribute towards the goal of building robots that can effectively communicate with and assist humans in a variety of applications in domains that I believe will benefit from social robots. This work was sponsored in part by a Graduate Research Fellowship from the National Science Foundation Thesis Supervisor: Cynthia Breazeal Title: Assistant Professor of Media Arts and Sciences

[1]  M. Argyle,et al.  Gaze and Mutual Gaze , 1994, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[2]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Interactivity in human–computer interaction: a study of credibility, understanding, and influence , 2000 .

[3]  Youngme Moon,et al.  The effects of distance in local versus remote human-computer interaction , 1998, CHI.

[4]  Matthew Lombard,et al.  At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence , 2006 .

[5]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  Mental models of robotic assistants , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[6]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Humor in task-oriented computer-mediated communication and human-computer interaction , 1998, CHI Conference Summary.

[7]  B. Latané.  The psychology of social impact. , 1981 .

[8]  Norah E. Dunbar,et al.  Testing the Interactivity Principle: Effects of Mediation, Propinquity, and Verbal and Nonverbal Modalities in Interpersonal Interaction , 2002 .

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

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

[11]  H. Sypher,et al.  Communication Research Measures: A Sourcebook , 1994 .

[12]  Robin R. Murphy,et al.  Human-robot interactions during the robot-assisted urban search and rescue response at the World Trade Center , 2003, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[13]  J. Tomaka,et al.  Presence of human friends and pet dogs as moderators of autonomic responses to stress in women. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[14]  Jim Blascovich,et al.  Presence of human friends and pet dogs as moderators of autonomic responses to stress in women. , 1991 .

[15]  A. Aron,et al.  Statistics for Psychology , 1994 .

[16]  Matthew Lombard,et al.  MEASURING PRESENCE: A LITERATURE-BASED APPROACH TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A STANDARDIZED PAPER-AND-PENCIL INSTRUMENT , 2000 .

[17]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Designing Sociable Machines , 2002 .

[18]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Computers are social actors , 1994, CHI '94.

[19]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Toward sociable robots , 2003, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[20]  James H. Liu,et al.  Distance Matters: Physical Space and Social Impact , 1995 .

[21]  M. Dawson,et al.  The electrodermal system , 2007 .

[22]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Anthropomorphism, agency, and ethopoeia: computers as social actors , 1993, INTERCHI Adjunct Proceedings.

[23]  Justine Cassell,et al.  Avatar-augmented online conversation , 2003 .

[24]  D. Fox,et al.  Towards Personal Service Robots for the Elderly , 1999 .

[25]  O. John,et al.  Big Five Inventory , 2012, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[26]  M. Cary.  The Role of Gaze in the Initiation of Conversation , 1978 .

[27]  Liping Zhao,et al.  Driver Duty: A Pattern for Public Transport Systems , 1998, J. Object Oriented Program..

[28]  C. Breazeal.  Sociable Machines: Expressive Social Ex-change Between Humans and Robots , 2000 .

[29]  Gloria Mark,et al.  Why distance matters: effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception , 2002, CSCW '02.

[30]  Luis M. Camarinha-Matos,et al.  Intelligent mobile agents in elderly care , 1999, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[31]  Batya Friedman,et al.  I care about him as a pal , 2002, CHI 2002.

[32]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  Cooperation with a robotic assistant , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[33]  G. Mcnicoll.  World Population Ageing 1950-2050. , 2002 .

[34]  T. Bickmore.  Relational agents : effecting change through human-computer relationships , 2003 .

[35]  Arne Jönsson,et al.  Wizard of Oz studies: why and how , 1993, IUI '93.

[36]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  The impact of anthropomorphic interfaces on influence understanding, and credibility , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[37]  T. Koda,et al.  Agents with faces: the effect of personification , 1996, Proceedings 5th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication. RO-MAN'96 TSUKUBA.