Methodological Issues in Scenario-Based Evaluation of Human–Robot Interaction

Xu, Qianli; Ng, Jamie; Tan, Odelia; Huang, Zhiyong; Tay, Benedict Tiong Chee; Park, Taezoon

doi:10.1007/s12369-014-0248-9

Cited by 29 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of UX evaluation entails a wide set of methods, techniques, and skills that are applied and often combined in order to systematically identify how users perceive and experience an interactive system/product/service before, during, and after interacting with it. It should be pointed out, however, that several misleading terms are commonly used in the HRI literature (e.g., [ 64 , 65 , 75 , 132 , 133 ]), where the term ”user evaluation” is commonly used, rather than the more appropriate terms “usability evaluation” [ 93 ] or “UX evaluation” [ 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 71 ]. At first glance, the difference between the terms seems negligible.…”

Section: Theoretical Lens and Methodological Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ANEMONE: Theoretical Foundations for UX Evaluation of Action and Intention Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction

Lindblom¹,

Alenljung²

2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The coexistence of robots and humans in shared physical and social spaces is expected to increase. A key enabler of high-quality interaction is a mutual understanding of each other’s actions and intentions. In this paper, we motivate and present a systematic user experience (UX) evaluation framework of action and intention recognition between humans and robots from a UX perspective, because there is an identified lack of this kind of evaluation methodology. The evaluation framework is packaged into a methodological approach called ANEMONE (action and intention recognition in human robot interaction). ANEMONE has its foundation in cultural-historical activity theory (AT) as the theoretical lens, the seven stages of action model, and user experience (UX) evaluation methodology, which together are useful in motivating and framing the work presented in this paper. The proposed methodological approach of ANEMONE provides guidance on how to measure, assess, and evaluate the mutual recognition of actions and intentions between humans and robots for investigators of UX evaluation. The paper ends with a discussion, addresses future work, and some concluding remarks.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Lens and Methodological Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ANEMONE: Theoretical Foundations for UX Evaluation of Action and Intention Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction

Lindblom¹,

Alenljung²

2020

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, external factors, such as the environments, background or situation, mediate the interactions [32]. While direct interactions between robots and users are preferable in the evaluation of humanrobot interaction, there are many practical factors (e.g., privacy, cost, time, and safety) that may restrict this ideal form of evaluation [8].…”

Section: B Utilizing Text-based Use Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To overcome this problem, use scenarios can be deployed in other forms such as text, video, virtual reality, acted demo, and so forth. Xu et al [32] explored the effects of deploying these different media to evaluate humanrobot interaction scenarios. The authors concluded that exploring of the users' instrumental needs or cognitive attitudes could be assessed without great details that faithfully convey the human-robot interactions scenarios, and that the deployment of both video and interactive video leads to biased user attitudes.…”

Section: B Utilizing Text-based Use Scenariosmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation of different roles for domestic social robots

Graaf

Allouch

2015

2015 24th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotics researchers foresee that robots will become ubiquitous in our natural environments, such as our homes. For a successful diffusion of social robots, it is important to study the user acceptance of such robots. In an online survey, we have investigated the acceptance of three different possible roles for domestic social robots and the preferred appearance. The results show that, although most people prefer a humanoid robot for domestic purposes, the role for which a social robot is build affects the choice for a robotic appearance made by potential future users. When comparing the acceptance of the three different roles, people evaluate the companion robot more negatively on the different acceptance variables. Implications of these results are discussed.

show abstract

“…(1) see Venkatesh et al [269] for an overview of the outcomes of positive disconfirmation The logic for examining contingency factors proposes that there is not one best HRI design [260]. Rather, the human-related outcomes of HRI depend on the culture (for an overview see [79]), the setting (for an overview see [177]), the scenario (for an overview see [285]), and the human participants. Some empirical studies that focused on emotions during HRI mention moderator variables (see Sect.…”

Section: Underlying Mechanisms Include Primitive Contagion Via Mimicking and Conscious Contagion Via Social Comparisonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survey of Emotions in Human–Robot Interactions: Perspectives from Robotic Psychology on 20 Years of Research

Stock‐Homburg

2021

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge production within the interdisciplinary field of human–robot interaction (HRI) with social robots has accelerated, despite the continued fragmentation of the research domain. Together, these features make it hard to remain at the forefront of research or assess the collective evidence pertaining to specific areas, such as the role of emotions in HRI. This systematic review of state-of-the-art research into humans’ recognition and responses to artificial emotions of social robots during HRI encompasses the years 2000–2020. In accordance with a stimulus–organism–response framework, the review advances robotic psychology by revealing current knowledge about (1) the generation of artificial robotic emotions (stimulus), (2) human recognition of robotic artificial emotions (organism), and (3) human responses to robotic emotions (response), as well as (4) other contingencies that affect emotions as moderators.

show abstract

Methodological Issues in Scenario-Based Evaluation of Human–Robot Interaction

Cited by 29 publications

References 40 publications

The ANEMONE: Theoretical Foundations for UX Evaluation of Action and Intention Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction

The ANEMONE: Theoretical Foundations for UX Evaluation of Action and Intention Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction

The evaluation of different roles for domestic social robots

Survey of Emotions in Human–Robot Interactions: Perspectives from Robotic Psychology on 20 Years of Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About