I'm sorry, Dave: i'm afraid i won't do that: social aspects of human-agent conflict

ABSTRACT

As computational agents become more sophisticated, it will frequently be necessary for the agents to disagree with users. In these cases, it might be useful for the agent to use politeness strategies that defuse the person's frustrations and preserve the human-computer relationship. One such strategy is distancing, which we implemented by spatially distancing an agent's voice from its body. In a 2 (agent disagreement: none vs. some) x 2 (agent voice location: on robotic body vs. in control box) between-participants experiment, we studied the effects of agent disagreement and agent voice location in a collaborative human-agent desert survival task (N=40). People changed their answers more often when agents disagreed with them and felt more similar to agents that always agreed with them, even when substantive content was identical. Strikingly, people felt more positively toward the disagreeing agent whose voice came from a separate control box rather than from its body; for agreement, the body-attached voice was preferred.

REFERENCES

• 1: Black, A. W. and Lenzo, K. A. Building synthetic voices. Language Technologies Institute, Carnegie Mellon University and Cepstral LLC. http://festvox.org/bsv/
• 2: Breazeal, C., Gray, J., Hoffman, G. and Berlin, M. Social robots: Beyond tools to partners. Proc. ROMAN 2004, IEEE (2004), 551--556.
• 3: Breazeal, C., Kidd, C.D., Thomaz, A.L., Hoffman, G. and Berlin, M. Effects of nonverbal communication on efficiency and robustness in human-robot teamwork. IROS 2005, IEEE (2005).
• 4: Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1978.
• 5: Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I. and Dautenhahn, K. A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42 (2003), 143--166.
• 6: Batya Friedman , Peter H. Kahn, Jr. , Jennifer Hagman, Hardware companions?: what online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, April 05-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA [doi>10.1145/642611.642660]
• 7: Francine Gemperle , Carl DiSalvo , Jodi Forlizzi , Willy Yonkers, The Hug: a new form for communication, Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Designing for user experiences, June 06-07, 2003, San Francisco, California [doi>10.1145/997078.997103]
• 8: Geertz, C. The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 2000.
• 9: Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books, New York, NY, USA, 1959.
• 10: Groom, V. and Nass, C. Can robots Be teammates?: Benchmarks and predictors of failure in human-robot teams. Interaction Studies (2008), 8(3), 483--500.
• 11: Guerin, B. Mere presence effects in humans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 22 (1986), 38--77.
• 12: Horwitz, S. K. The compositional impact of team diversity on performance. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 2 (2005), 219--245.
• 13: Scott R. Klemmer , Björn Hartmann , Leila Takayama, How bodies matter: five themes for interaction design, Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems, June 26-28, 2006, University Park, PA, USA [doi>10.1145/1142405.1142429]
• 14: Kubrick, S. 2001: A Space Odyssey. MGM (1968).
• 15: Vladimir A. Kulyukin, On natural language dialogue with assistive robots, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121270]
• 16: Lafferty, J.C. and Eady, P.M. The desert survival problem. Experimental Learning Methods, Plymouth, MI, 1974.
• 17: Lee, K.M. Presence, explicated. Communication Theory 14 (2004), 27--50.
• 18: 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]
• 19: Maglio, P., Matlock, T., Gould, S.J., Koons, D. and Campbell, C.S. On understanding discourse in human-computer interaction. Proc. Cog Sci 2002, LEA (2002), 602--607.
• 20: Bilge Mutlu , Steven Osman , Jodi Forlizzi , Jessica Hodgins , Sara Kiesler, Perceptions of ASIMO: an exploration on co-operation and competition with humans and humanoid robots, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121311]
• 21: Nass, C. and Brave, S.B. Wired For Speech. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2005.
• 22: Nass, C. and Steuer, J. Voices, boxes, and sources of messages. Human Communication Research 19, 4 (1993), 504--527.
• 23: Nass, C., Takayama, L. and Brave, S.B. Social Consistency. In Zhang, P. and Galletta, D. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations, M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, USA, 2006.
• 24: Jakob Nielsen, Coordinating User Interfaces for Consistency, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 2001
• 25: Patel, K., Bailenson, J.N., Hack-Jung, S., Diankov, R. and Bajcsy, R. The effects of fully immersive virtual reality on the learning of physical tasks. Proc. Presence 2006, ISPR (2006).
• 26: Aaron Powers , Sara Kiesler, The advisor robot: tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121280]
• 27: Aaron Powers , Sara Kiesler , Susan Fussell , Cristen Torrey, Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot, Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, March 10-12, 2007, Arlington, Virginia, USA [doi>10.1145/1228716.1228736]
• 28: Reeves, B. and Nass, C. The Media Equation. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, CA, USA, 1996.
• 29: Aaron Steinfeld , Terrence Fong , David Kaber , Michael Lewis , Jean Scholtz , Alan Schultz , Michael Goodrich, Common metrics for human-robot interaction, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121249]
• 30: Sundar, S. S. and Nass, C. Source orientation in human-computer interaction. Communication Research 27, 6 (2000), 683--703.
• 31: Takayama, L. Throwing voices: Investigating the psychological effects of the spatial location of projected voices. Dissertation (2008).
• 32: Michael L. Walters , Kerstin Dautenhahn , Sarah N. Woods , Kheng Lee Koay, Robotic etiquette: results from user studies involving a fetch and carry task, Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, March 10-12, 2007, Arlington, Virginia, USA [doi>10.1145/1228716.1228759]
• 33: Emily Wang , Constantine Lignos , Ashish Vatsal , Brian Scassellati, Effects of head movement on perceptions of humanoid robot behavior, Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, March 02-03, 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [doi>10.1145/1121241.1121273]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.1 Multimedia Information Systems

General Terms:
Experimentation

Keywords:
disagreement, distancing, human-agent interaction, human-robot interaction, spatial audio, throwing voices