Robots beyond Science Fiction: mutual learning in human–robot interaction on the way to participatory approaches

Weiss, Astrid; Spiel, Katta

doi:10.1007/s00146-021-01209-w

Cited by 35 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 81 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even rigorous attempts to involve stakeholders and target groups in design risk falling short of the ideals of UCD. For instance, Weiss and Spiel (2021) provide a much-needed exposé of what goes on behind the scenes of HRI-projects, and direct criticism (and selfreflection) towards the situations they have observed. Even in cases, where stakeholders are involved in phases of conceptualization, design, and later evaluations, it is not always clear to what extent stakeholders actually come to influence design outcomes.…”

Section: The (Not So) Straightforward Path To Robot Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: special issue—critical robotics research

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Furthermore, this special issue would not have been possible without the excellent work of all the peer reviewers. Finally, thanks to our fellow researchers within Applied Robotics for their continued support, and the Division of Learning, Communication and IT at the Department of Applied IT, University of Gothenburg for investing in open access fees for this editorial.Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long 8 https:// eng. irl. sys. es. osaka-u. ac. jp/.

show abstract

Section: The (Not So) Straightforward Path To Robot Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction: special issue—critical robotics research

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Current robots' capacities are still relatively limited compared to the general public's expectations (Malle et al 2021), which are often influenced by unrealistic representations conveyed in the media (Weiss and Spiel 2021). Thus, it is not uncommon for participants to be disappointed when they meet a robot for the first time (de Graaf et al 2017).…”

Section: The Relevance Of Studying Robot-recipient Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies in human-computer interaction have taken a more interdisciplinary and qualitative 1 3 approach. Some of them explore how best to coordinate a robot's talk and embodied actions to create an appropriate spatial formation, engage participants, or select a recipient (Kuzuoka et al 2010;Yamazaki et al 2009Yamazaki et al , 2012. Others, with less direct implications for design (Dourish 2006), explore how people talk to machines (e.g., Fischer 2010;Fischer et al 2012;Pelikan and Broth 2016;Porcheron et al 2018), addressing aspects and phenomena such as semantics, utterance flow, or repair sequences.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recipient design in human–robot interaction: the emergent assessment of a robot’s competence

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People meeting a robot for the first time do not know what it is capable of and therefore how to interact with it—what actions to produce, and how to produce them. Despite social robotics’ long-standing interest in the effects of robots’ appearance and conduct on users, and efforts to identify factors likely to improve human–robot interaction, little attention has been paid to how participants evaluate their robotic partner in the unfolding of actual interactions. This paper draws from qualitative analyses of video-recorded interactions between a robot and groups of participants, in the framework of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. We analyse the particular ways in which participants shape their embodied actions, how they can reproduce a prior action that failed to obtain a response from the robot; and how they explore the robot’s embodied nature. We find a set of recurrent methods or practices, showing that robot-recipient design displays not only participants’ initial assumptions about the robot’s competences, but also more importantly perhaps their continuous assessment of the robot’s behaviour, and their attempts to adapt to it. Participants locally produce and constantly revise their understanding of the robot as a more or less competent co-participant, drawing from its past, current, and projected conduct and responsiveness. We discuss the implications of these findings for research in robotics and human–robot interactions, and the value of the approach to shed new light on old questions by paying attention to the quality of gesture and the sequential organisation of interaction.

show abstract

“…For instance, Kerstin Dautenhahn writes that HRI methodologies sometimes fail to address "how real people, in real-world environments, would interact face to face with a real robot" [111]. As a part of this development, more HRI studies are now incorporating qualitative methods [112][113][114]. These methods can help to study interactions in which complex, autonomous robots interact with people in unrestricted (or less restricted) contexts.…”

Section: Ethical Sociotechnical Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From EU Robotics and AI Governance to HRI Research: Implementing the Ethics Narrative

Pagter

2023

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the European Union has made considerable efforts to develop dedicated strategies and policies for the governance of robotics and AI. An important component of the EU’s approach is its emphasis on the need to mitigate the potential societal impacts of the expected rise in the interactive capacities of autonomous systems. In the quest to define and implement new policies addressing this issue, ethical notions have taken an increasingly central position. This paper presents a concise overview of the integration of this ethics narrative in the EU’s policy plans. It demonstrates how the ethics narrative aids the definition of policy issues and the establishment of new policy ideas. Crucially, in this context, robotics and AI are explicitly understood as emerging technologies. This implies many ambiguities about their actual future impact, which in turn results in uncertainty regarding effective implementation of policies that draw on the ethics narrative. In an effort to develop clearer pathways towards the further development of ethical notions in AI and robotics governance, this paper understands human-robot interaction (HRI) research as a field that can play an important role in the implementation of ethics. Four different complementary pathways towards ethics integration in (HRI) research are proposed, namely: providing insights for the improvement of ethical assessment, further research into the moral competence of artificial agents, engage in value-based design and implementation of robots, and participation in discussions on building ethical sociotechnical systems around robots.

show abstract

Robots beyond Science Fiction: mutual learning in human–robot interaction on the way to participatory approaches

Cited by 35 publications

References 81 publications

Introduction: special issue—critical robotics research

Introduction: special issue—critical robotics research

Recipient design in human–robot interaction: the emergent assessment of a robot’s competence

From EU Robotics and AI Governance to HRI Research: Implementing the Ethics Narrative

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About