An Experimental Study on Emotional Reactions Towards a Robot

Pütten, Astrid M. Rosenthal‐von der; Krämer, Nicole C.; Hoffmann, Laura; Sobieraj, Sabrina; Eimler, Sabrina C.

doi:10.1007/s12369-012-0173-8

Cited by 230 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This is supported by studies done by Rosenthal-von der Pütten et al [5] who investigated the neural correlates of emotional reactions of humans towards a robot. Empathy is characteristic of this stage.…”

Section: B) Cognitive Interpretationsmentioning

confidence: 59%

The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics

Lemaignan

Fink

Dillenbourg

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-While anthropomorphism in robotics is a commonly discussed trait of HRI, it paradoxically lacks formal grounds. Supported by an extensive literature review, a long-term field study and two other on-going experiments, this report gives a first overview of a formal model of anthromorphism that we are currently building. Going beyond the traditional perception of anthropomorphism as a static feature of a system, we propose to understand anthropomorphism as a dynamic, non-monotonic and context-dependent process, which evolves over time, and has deep cognitive implications. I. THE DYNAMICS OF ANTHROPOMORPHISMMany robotics researchers tend to believe that anthropomorphism describes a set of human-like features of a robot (like shape, speech capabilities, facial expression). We refer to these characteristics as the anthropomorphic design of the robot [1]. Anthropomorphism, on the other hand, refers to the social phenomenon that emerges from the interaction between a robot and an user. According to Epley et al. [2], this includes for instance emotional states, motivations, intentions ascribed by the user to the robot.So far, the HRI community has not much investigated how anthropomorphism in human-robot interactions evolves over time (during the process of adopting a robot, for instance). Anthropomorphism is traditionally perceived in robotics as a static feature that once observed during a short-term interaction reflects a sustaining social effect. Based on an literature review previously published [1], a long-term field study in a natural environment [3], as well as two on-going childrobot experiments, we believe that anthropomorphic effects do evolve over time in non-monotonic ways, and play a central role in sustaining engagement in human-robot interaction.We propose to formalize these dynamic effects into a model that we call the dynamics of anthromorphism. We hope that it may support further discussions and reflections on how anthromorphism impacts human-robot interaction on the long run, and also foster research on the affective bonds induced by anthorpomorphic projections on robots.As such, we propose to represent how the level of anthropomorphic effects (i.e. observable manifestations of anthropomorphism) evolves over a long-term human-robot interaction (Figure 1). By long-term interaction, we mean direct (nonmediated), repeated interaction with the same robot, over an extended period of time (typically longer than a week). Three phasesWe distinguish three main phases, depicted in different shades in Figure 1. INITIALIZATION Fig. 1. Dynamics of anthropomorphism. We distinguish three main phases: initialization, familiarization and stabilization, preceded by a pre-interaction phase. In the pre-interaction phase, users build an initial capital of anthropomorphism (ICA). Once the interaction starts, the level of anthropomorphism increases due to the novelty effect [4], and then decreases to reach a stabilized level of anthropomorphism (SLA). During the interaction, unpredicted behaviors of the robot (d...

show abstract

Section: B) Cognitive Interpretationsmentioning

confidence: 59%

The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics

Lemaignan

Fink

Dillenbourg

2014

Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The validity and feasibility of these prohibitions, however, are challenged by actual data-not just anecdotal evidence gathered from the rather exceptional experiences of soldiers working with Packbots on the battlefield but numerous empirical studies of human/robot interaction that verify the media equation initially proposed by Reeves and Nass. In two recent studies (Rosenthal-von der Pütten et al 2013 andSuzuki et al 2015), for instance, researchers found that human users empathized with what appeared to be robot suffering even when they had prior experience with the device and knew that it was "just a machine." To put it in a rather crude vernacular form: Even when our head tells us it's just a robot, our heart cannot help but feel for it.…”

Section: S1 !S2mentioning

confidence: 99%

The other question: can and should robots have rights?

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several researchers have employed GSR to characterize people's responses during HRI or to enable a robot to respond to a human's affective state [21,28,35,39,45].…”

Section: Galvanic Skin Response (Gsr)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individually, the two scales measure Negative Affect (NA) and Positive Affect (PA), where the lowest possible individual NA or PA score is 10 and the highest is 50. Both SAM and PANAS have been used extensively in psychology and HRI research to measure emotional state [2,35,36,44]. We adapted the text from [5] and [43] for the SAM and PANAS questionnaires we administered.…”

Section: Emotional Statementioning

confidence: 99%

An Investigation of Responses to Robot-Initiated Touch in a Nursing Context

Chen

King

Thomaz

et al. 2013

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physical human-robot interaction has the potential to be useful in a number of domains, but this will depend on how people respond to the robot's actions. For some domains, such as healthcare, a robot is likely to initiate physical contact with a person's body. In order to investigate how people respond to this type of interaction, we conducted an experiment with 56 people in which a robotic nurse autonomously touched and wiped each participant's forearm. On average, participants had a favorable response to the first time the robot touched them. However, we found that the perceived intent of the robot significantly influenced people's responses. If people believed that the robot intended to clean their arms, the participants tended to respond more favorably than if they believed the robot intended to comfort them, even though the robot's manipulation behavior was the same. Our results suggest that roboticists should consider this social factor in addition to the mechanics of physical interaction. Surprisingly, we found that participants in our study responded less favorably when given a verbal warning prior to the robot's actions. In addition to these main results, we present post-hoc analyses of participants' galvanic skin responses (GSR), open-ended responses, attitudes towards robots, and responses to a second trial.

show abstract

An Experimental Study on Emotional Reactions Towards a Robot

Cited by 230 publications

References 55 publications

The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics

The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics

The other question: can and should robots have rights?

An Investigation of Responses to Robot-Initiated Touch in a Nursing Context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About