Designing Robots with the Context in Mind- One Design Does Not Fit All

Liberman-Pincu, Ela; Grondelle, Elmer D. van; Oron-Gilad, Tal

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-22731-8_8

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Otherwise, missing such considerations may contribute to having robots deemed safe because they comply with the standard (which is user-neutral) but are unsafe for different users, which at the end of the day are who should remain at all times safe. This leads to uncertainty as to the protected scope of the framework in relation to different user types and raises the question to what extent diversity and inclusion are sufficiently taken into consideration [68,98,112].…”

Section: When Standards Fail To Account For Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for Diversity in Robot Design, Testbeds, and Safety Standardization

Fosch‐Villaronga

Drukarch

2023

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science has started highlighting the importance of integrating diversity considerations in medicine and healthcare. However, there is little research into how these considerations apply, affect, and should be integrated into concrete healthcare innovations such as rehabilitation robotics. Robot policy ecosystems are also oblivious to the vast landscape of gender identity understanding, often ignoring these considerations and failing to guide developers in integrating them to ensure they meet user needs. While this ignorance may be for the traditional heteronormative configuration of the medical, technical, and legal world, the ending result is the failure of roboticists to consider them in robot development. However, missing diversity, equity, and inclusion considerations can result in robotic systems that can compromise user safety, be discriminatory, and not respect their fundamental rights. This paper explores the impact of overlooking gender and sex considerations in robot design on users. We focus on the safety standard for personal care robots ISO 13482:2014 and zoom in on lower-limb exoskeletons. Our findings signal that ISO 13482:2014 has significant gaps concerning intersectional aspects like sex, gender, age, or health conditions and, because of that, developers are creating robot systems that, despite adherence to the standard, can still cause harm to users. In short, our observations show that robotic exoskeletons operate intimately with users’ bodies, thus exemplifying how gender and medical conditions might introduce dissimilarities in human–robot interaction that, as long as they remain ignored in regulations, may compromise user safety. We conclude the article by putting forward particular recommendations to update ISO 13482:2014 to reflect better the broad diversity of users of personal care robots.

show abstract

Section: When Standards Fail To Account For Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for Diversity in Robot Design, Testbeds, and Safety Standardization

Fosch‐Villaronga

Drukarch

2023

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Robot impression is formed by the appearance and verbal and attitudinal cues that robots exhibit (e.g., Urakami and Sutthithatip, 2021 ; Liberman-Pincu et al, 2023 ). Although these features are important in the design of a comforting robot, especially for interaction with humans, spoken and behavioral indications are equally important because they help in information transfer ( Saeki and Ueda, 2024 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of politeness and performance quality of android robots on future interaction decisions: a conversational design perspective

Saeki,

Ueda

2024

Front. Robot. AI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite robots being applied in various situations of modern society, some people avoid them or do not feel comfortable interacting with them. Designs that allow robots to interact appropriately with people will make a positive impression on them resulting in a better evaluation of robots, which will solve this problem. To establish such a design, this study conducted two scenario-based experiments focusing on the politeness of the robot’s conversation and behavior, and examined the impressions caused when the robot succeeds or slightly fails at a task. These two experiments revealed that regardless of whether the partner is a robot or a human, politeness not only affected the impression of interaction but also the expectations for better task results on the next occasion. Although the effect of politeness on preference toward robot agents was smaller than those toward human agents when agents failed a task, people were more likely to interact with polite robots and human agents again because they thought that they would not fail the next time. This study revealed that politeness motivates people to interact with robots repeatedly even if they make minor mistakes, suggesting that the politeness design is important for encouraging human-robot interaction.

show abstract