The effects of robot touch and proactive behaviour on perceptions of human-robot interactions.

ABSTRACT

Despite robots' embodiment, the effect of physical contact or touch and its interaction with robots' autonomous behaviour has been a mostly overlooked aspect of human-robot interaction. This video-based, 2x2 between-subject survey experiment (N=119) found that touch and proactiveness interacted in their effects on perceived machine-likeness and dependability. Attitude towards robots in general also interacted with the effects of touch. Results show the value of further exploring the combination of physical aspects of human-robot interaction and proactiveness.

REFERENCES

• 1: Vanessa Evers , Heidy C. Maldonado , Talia L. Brodecki , Pamela J. Hinds, Relational vs. group self-construal: untangling the role of national culture in HRI, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, March 12-15, 2008, Amsterdam, The Netherlands [doi>10.1145/1349822.1349856]
• 2: Fisher, J.D., Rytting, M., and Heslin, R. 1976. Hands touching hands. Sociometry, 39, 4, 416--421.
• 3: Gueguen, N. 2002. Touch, awareness of touch, and compliance with a request. Perc.&Motor Skills 95, 2, 355--360.
• 4: Pamela J. Hinds , Teresa L. Roberts , Hank Jones, Whose job is it anyway? a study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task, Human-Computer Interaction, v.19 n.1, p.151-181, June 2004 [doi>10.1207/s15327051hci1901&2_7]
• 5: Anthony Jameson , Eric Schwarzkopf, Pros and Cons of Controllability: An Empirical Study, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, p.193-202, May 29-31, 2002
• 6: Kim, T., and Hinds, P.J. 2006. Who should I blame? Effects of autonomy and transparency on attributions in HRI. Proc. RO-MAN'06, 80--85.
• 7: Kwan Min Lee , Younbo Jung , Jaywoo Kim , Sang Ryong Kim, Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people's loneliness in human-robot interaction, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.64 n.10, p.962-973, October 2006 [doi>10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.002]
• 8: Nomura, T. Kanda, T. Suzuki, T., and Kato, K. 2004. Psychology in H-R communication, Proc. RO-MAN '04, 35--40.
• 9: Michael L. Walters , Dag S. Syrdal , Kerstin Dautenhahn , René Te Boekhorst , Kheng Lee Koay, Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion, Autonomous Robots, v.24 n.2, p.159-178, February 2008 [doi>10.1007/s10514-007-9058-3]
• 10: Woods, S., Walters, M.L., Koay, K.L., and Dautenhahn, K. 2006. Methodological issues in HRI: A comparison of live and video-based methods in robot to human approach direction trials. Proc. RO-MAN 2006, 51--58.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.m Miscellaneous

General Terms:
Experimentation, Human Factors

Keywords:
autonomy, human-robot interaction, proactiveness, touch