Towards an imperfect robot for long-term companionship: case studies using cognitive biases

The research presented in this paper aims to find out what affect cognitive biases play in a robot's interactive behaviour for the goal of developing human-robot long-term companionship. It is expected that by utilising cognitive biases in a robot's interactive behaviours, making the robot cognitively imperfect, will affect how people relate to the robot thereby changing the process of long-term companionship. Previous research carried out in this area based on human-like cognitive characteristics in robots to create and maintain long-term relationship between robots and humans have yet to focus on developing human-like cognitive biases and as such is new to this application in robotics. To start working with cognitive biases `misattribution' and `empathic gap' have been selected which have been shown to be very common biases in humans and as such play a role on human-human interactions and long-term relationships.

[1]  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.

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

[3]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Methodology & Themes of Human-Robot Interaction: A Growing Research Field , 2007 .

[4]  Piero Cosi,et al.  Long-term human-robot interaction with young users , 2011, HRI 2011.

[5]  Mriganka Biswas,et al.  Effect of cognitive biases on human-robot interaction: A case study of a robot's misattribution , 2014, The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[6]  Ronald C. Arkin,et al.  Time-Varying Affective Response for Humanoid Robots , 2009, FIRA.

[7]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Social interactions in HRI: the robot view , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[8]  Eduardo Benítez Sandoval,et al.  Human Robot Interaction and Fiction: A Contradiction , 2014, ICSR.

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

[10]  R. MacCoun,et al.  Biases in the interpretation and use of research results. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

[11]  J. Baron Thinking and Deciding , 2023 .

[12]  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 .

[13]  Stefan Wermter,et al.  MIRA: A Learning Multimodal Interactive Robot Agent , 2008, 2008 Eighth International Conference on Hybrid Intelligent Systems.

[14]  Christoph Bartneck,et al.  Iterative design process for robots with personality , 2009 .

[15]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Social Cognition: How Individuals Construct Social Reality , 2004 .