Cheery companions or serious assistants? Role and demeanor congruity as predictors of robot attraction and use intentions among senior citizens

Abstract Using a robot designed for senior citizens in a retirement home setting, an experiment (N=51) was conducted to investigate whether variations in the role (companion vs. assistant) and social demeanor (playful vs. serious) of a robot influence senior citizens’ perceptions of the robot's social attractiveness, intelligence, anxiety, and eeriness. Results show that assistant robots are perceived as more socially attractive and intelligent when their demeanor is playful rather than serious. In addition, companion robots are evaluated as less anxious and less eerie when their personality is serious rather than playful. Finally, companion robots with a serious demeanor have a positive indirect effect on robot use intentions via heightened perceptions of intelligence and social attractiveness, while assistant robots with a playful demeanor have a positive indirect effect on intentions via lower perceptions of anxiety. The implications of our findings for human-robot interaction and the design of socially assistive robotics are discussed.

[1]  Holly A. Yanco,et al.  Wheelesley: A Robotic Wheelchair System: Indoor Navigation and User Interface , 1998, Assistive Technology and Artificial Intelligence.

[2]  J. Reyher,et al.  Paternalistic vs egalitarian physician styles: the treatment of patients in crisis. , 1985, The Journal of family practice.

[3]  Sebastian Thrun,et al.  Learning user models of mobility-related activities through instrumented walking aids , 2004, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA '04. 2004.

[4]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[5]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Person identification and interaction of social robots by using wireless tags , 2003, Proceedings 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003) (Cat. No.03CH37453).

[6]  P. Rochat,et al.  The Uncanny Valley: Existence and Explanations , 2015 .

[7]  C. Nass,et al.  Technology and Roles: A Tale of Two TVs , 1996 .

[8]  Patrice D. Tremoulet,et al.  Perceptual causality and animacy , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[9]  Illah R. Nourbakhsh,et al.  A survey of socially interactive robots , 2003, Robotics Auton. Syst..

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

[11]  J. Kätsyri,et al.  A review of empirical evidence on different uncanny valley hypotheses: support for perceptual mismatch as one road to the valley of eeriness , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[12]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Measurement Instruments for the Anthropomorphism, Animacy, Likeability, Perceived Intelligence, and Perceived Safety of Robots , 2009, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[13]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. , 2014, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[14]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[16]  Ki Joon Kim.  Can smartphones be specialists? Effects of specialization in mobile advertising , 2014, Telematics Informatics.

[17]  J. Seyama,et al.  Eye direction aftereffect , 2006, Psychological research.

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

[19]  C. Nass,et al.  How “Real” Are Computer Personalities? , 1996 .

[20]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human–robot interaction , 2007, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[21]  Roger K. Moore.  A Bayesian explanation of the ‘Uncanny Valley’ effect and related psychological phenomena , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[22]  D. Wegner,et al.  Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley , 2012, Cognition.

[23]  Youngme Moon.  Intimate Exchanges: Using Computers to Elicit Self-Disclosure from Consumers , 2000 .

[24]  A. Hayes.  Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach , 2013 .

[25]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Heuristic Versus Systematic Processing of Specialist Versus Generalist Sources in Online Media , 2010 .

[26]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Are specialist robots better than generalist robots? , 2011, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

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

[28]  Bryan L. Bonner,et al.  The Effects of Extroversion on Influence in Ambiguous Group Tasks , 2000 .

[29]  Brian R. Duffy,et al.  Anthropomorphism and the social robot , 2003, Robotics Auton. Syst..

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

[31]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Source Orientation in Human-Computer Interaction , 2000, Commun. Res..

[32]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Wired for Speech: How Voice Activates and Advances the Human-Computer Relationship , 2005 .

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

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

[35]  Robin R. Murphy,et al.  Affective expression in appearance constrained robots , 2006, HRI '06.

[36]  Haizhou Li,et al.  Making Social Robots More Attractive: The Effects of Voice Pitch, Humor and Empathy , 2013, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[37]  K. M. Lee,et al.  Can robots manifest personality? : An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human-robot interaction , 2006 .

[38]  Aaron Powers,et al.  Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation , 2003, The 12th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2003. Proceedings. ROMAN 2003..

[39]  M. Treviño,et al.  Noradrenergic ‘Tone’ Determines Dichotomous Control of Cortical Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity , 2012, Scientific Reports.

[40]  H. Aarts,et al.  Habits as knowledge structures: Automaticity in goal-directed behavior , 2000 .

[41]  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.

[42]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Design spaces and niche spaces of believable social robots , 2002, Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[43]  H. Ishiguro,et al.  The thing that should not be: predictive coding and the uncanny valley in perceiving human and humanoid robot actions , 2011, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[44]  C. Bartneck,et al.  More human than human: does the uncanny curve really matter? , 2013, HRI 2013.

[45]  C. N. Scanaill,et al.  A Review of Approaches to Mobility Telemonitoring of the Elderly in Their Living Environment , 2006, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.