skip to main content
research-article

Child-robot interaction across cultures

Published: 01 November 2014 Publication History

Abstract

We examine the effect of culture (individualistic vs. collectivisitic) and age in child-robot interaction.8Years old children are more positive about their interaction with a robot than 12year old children.While interacting with a robot, Pakistani children are more expressive than Dutch ones.Children playing a game with a friend are more expressive than those playing with a robot.The factors culture, and age are crucial for designing better child-robot interactions. The present study investigates how children from two different cultural backgrounds (Pakistani, Dutch) and two different age groups (8 and 12year olds) experience interacting with a social robot (iCat) during collaborative game play. We propose a new method to evaluate children's interaction with such a robot, by asking whether playing a game with a state-of-the-art social robot like the iCat is more similar to playing this game alone or with a friend. A combination of self-report scores, perception test results and behavioral analyses indicate that child-robot interaction in game playing situations is highly appreciated by children, although more by Pakistani and younger children than by Dutch and older children. Results also suggest that children enjoyed playing with the robot more than playing alone, but enjoyed playing with a friend even more. In a similar vein, we found that children were more expressive in their non-verbal behavior when playing with the robot than when they were playing alone, but less expressive than when playing with a friend. Our results not only stress the importance of using new benchmarks for evaluating child-robot interaction but also highlight the significance of cultural differences for the design of social robots.

References

[1]
S. Aubrey, A cross-cultural discussion of Japan and South Korea and how differences are manifested in the ESL/EFL classroom, Asian Social Science, 5 (2009) 34-39.
[2]
C. Bartneck, T. Nomura, T. Kanda, T. Suzuki, K. Kennsuke, A cross-cultural study on attitudes towards robots, in: Proceedings of the HCI international conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2005, pp. 1981-1983.
[3]
C. Bartneck, T. Suzuki, T. Kanda, T. Nomura, The influence of people's culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots, AI Society, 21 (2007) 217-230.
[4]
C. Breazeal, Designing sociable robots, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2002.
[5]
G. Castellano, I. Leite, A. Pereira, C. Martinho, A. Paiva, P. McOwan, Affect recognition for interactive companions: Challenges and design in real world scenarios, Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces, 3 (2010) 89-98.
[6]
H.K. Cho, K.P. Park, J.H. Han, D.K. Min, K.H. Ko, Education+robots: The vision and the action plans, Communications of the Korea Information Science Society, 26 (2008) 55-64.
[7]
K. Conn, N. Sarkar, W. Stone, Online affect detection and robot behavior adaptation for intervention of children with autism, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 24 (2008) 883-896.
[8]
K. Dautenhahn, S. Woods, C. Kaouri, M.L. Walters, K.L. Koay, I. Werry, What is a robot companion-friend, assistant or butler?, in: IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, 2005, pp. 1192-1197.
[9]
Y.A.W. de Kort, W.A. Ijsselsteijn, People, places and play: Player experience in a socio-spatial context, Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 6 (2008) 1-18.
[10]
P. Ekman, W. Friesen, Facial action coding system: A technique for the measurement of facial movement, Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, 1978.
[11]
H. Elfenbein, N. Ambady, M. Mandal, S. Harizuka, Cross-cultural patterns in emotion recognition: Highlighting design and analytical techniques, Emotion, 2 (2002) 75-84.
[12]
V. Evers, H.C. Maldonado, P. Hinds, Relational vs. group self-construal: Untangling the role of national culture in HRI, in: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on human robot interaction (HRI), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ACM, New York, 2008, pp. 255-262.
[13]
Francois, D. (2009). Facilitating play between children with autism and an autonomous robot. PhD Thesis. Adaptive Systems Research Group, School of Computer Science, University of Hertfordshire.
[14]
S.R. Fussell, S. Kiesler, L.D. Setlock, V. Yew, How people anthropomorphize robots, in: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on human robot interaction (HRI), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ACM, New York, 2008, pp. 145-152.
[15]
E.T. Hall, The hidden dimension, Doubleday, New York, 1966.
[16]
J. Han, E. Hyun, M. Kim, H. Cho, T. Kanda, T. Nomura, The cross-cultural acceptance of tutoring robots with augmented reality service, International Journal of Digital Content Technology and its Applications, 3 (2009) 95-102.
[17]
J.H. Han, M.H. Jo, V. Jones, J.H. Jo, Comparative study on the educational use of home robots for children, Journal of Information Processing Systems, 4 (2008) 159-168.
[18]
G. Hofstede, Culture's consequences, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, 1980.
[19]
C.H. Hui, H.C. Triandis, Individualism-collectivism: A study of cross-cultural researchers, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17 (1986) 225-248.
[20]
K. Isbister, Enabling social play: A framework for design and evaluation, in: Evaluating user experiences in games: Concepts and methods, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010, pp. 11-22.
[21]
P.H. Kahn, N.G. Freier, T. Kanda, H. Ishiguro, J.H. Ruckert, R.L. Severson, Design patterns for sociality in human-robot interaction, in: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (HRI), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, ACM, New York, 2008, pp. 97-104.
[22]
P.H. Kahn, B. Friedman, D.R. Perez-Granados, N.G. Freier, Robotic pets in the lives of preschool children, Interaction Studies, 7 (2006) 405-436.
[23]
Kaiser, S., & Wehrle, T. (1996). Situated emotional problem solving in interactive computer games. In N. H. Frijda (Ed.), Proceedings of the VIXth conference of the international society for research on emotions (ISRE'96), Toronto, Canada (pp. 276-280).
[24]
T. Kanda, T. Hirano, D. Eaton, H. Ishiguro, Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: A field trial, Human-Computer Interaction, 19 (2004) 61-84.
[25]
A. Kerepesi, E. Kubinyi, G.K. Jonsson, M.S. Magnusson, A. Miklósi, Behavioural comparison of human-animal (dog) and human-robot (AIBO) interactions, Behavioural Processes, 73 (2006) 92-99.
[26]
Y. Kim, S.S. Kwak, M. Kim, Am I acceptable to you? Effect of a robot's verbal language forms on people's social distance from robots, Computers in Human Behavior, 29 (2013) 1091-1101.
[27]
H. Kozima, C. Nakagawa, Y. Yasuda, Children-robot interaction: A pilot study in autism therapy, Progress in Brain Research, 164 (2007) 385-400.
[28]
R. Looije, M.A. Neerincx, V.D. Lange, Children's responses and opinion on three bots that motivate, educate and play, Journal of Physical Agents, 2 (2008) 13-20.
[29]
G.F. Melson, P.H. Kahn, A.M. Beck, B. Friedman, T. Roberts, E. Garrett, Robots as dogs? Children's interactions with the robotic dog aibo and a live Australian shepherd, in: Proceedings of human factors in computing (CHI) conference, Oregon, USA, ACM, New York, 2005, pp. 1649-1652.
[30]
B. Mesquita, J. Leu, The cultural psychology of emotions, in: Handbook for cultural psychology, Guilford Press, New York, 2007.
[31]
R.W. Mitchell, M. Hamm, The interpretation of animal psychology: Anthropomorphism or behavior reading?, Behaviour, 134 (1997) 173-204.
[32]
C. Nass, Y. Moon, Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers, Journal of Social Issues, 56 (2000) 81-103.
[33]
T. Nomura, T. Suzuki, T. Kanda, J. Han, N. Shin, J. Burke, What people assume about robots: Cross-cultural analysis between Japan, Korea, and the USA, in: Human robot interaction, I-Tech Education and Publishing, 2007, pp. 275-288.
[34]
K. Oh, M. Kim, Social attributes of robotic products: Observations of child-robot interactions in a school environment, International Journal of Design, 4 (2010) 45-55.
[35]
Oshlyansk, L. (2007). Cultural models in HCI: Hofstede, affordance and technology acceptance. PhD Thesis, Swansea University.
[36]
A.A. Pepe, L.U. Ellis, V.K. Sims, M.G. Chin, Go, dog, go: Maze training AIBO vs. a live dog. An exploratory study, Anthrozoös, 21 (2008) 71-83.
[37]
J.C. Read, Validating the fun toolkit: An instrument for measuring children's opinions of technology, Journal of Cognition, Technology & Work, 10 (2008) 119-128.
[38]
B. Reeves, C. Nass, The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1996.
[39]
F.N. Ribi, A. Yokoyama, D.C. Turner, Comparison of children's behavior toward Sony's robotic dog AIBO and a real dog: A pilot study, Anthrozoos, 21 (2008) 245-256.
[40]
C. Saarni, Children's understanding of display rules for expressive behavior, Developmental Psychology, 15 (1979) 424-429.
[41]
T. Salter, F. Michaud, H. Larouche, How wild is wild? A taxonomy to characterize the 'wildness' of child-robot interaction, International Journal of Social Robotics, 2 (2010) 405-415.
[42]
T. Salter, I. Werry, F. Michaud, Going into the wild in child-robot interaction studies: Issues in social robotic development, Intelligent Service Robotics, 1 (2008) 93-108.
[43]
S. Shahid, E. Krahmer, M. Swerts, Video-mediated and co-present gameplay: Effects of mutual gaze on game experience, expressiveness and perceived social presence, Interacting with Computers, 24 (2012) 292-305.
[44]
T. Shibata, K. Wada, K. Tanie, Subjective evaluation of a seal robot in Brunei, in: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN 2004), Kurashiki, Japan, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, 2004, pp. 135-140.
[45]
Shinozawa, K., Reeves, B., Wise, K., Lim, S., & Maldonado, H. (2003). Robots as new media: A cross-cultural examination of social and cognitive responses to robotic and on-screen agents. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Diego.
[46]
E. Short, J. Hart, M. Vu, B. Scassellati, No fair!! An interaction with a cheating robot, in: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI), Osaka, Japan, ACM, New York, 2010, pp. 219-226.
[47]
H. Spencer-Oatey, Rapport management: Basic concepts and issues, in: Culturally speaking: Managing relations in talk across cultures, Continuum International Publishing Group, London, 2000.
[48]
H.C. Triandis, E.M. Suh, Cultural influences on personality, Annual Review of Psychology, 53 (2002) 133-160.
[49]
L. Wang, P.-L.P. Rau, V. Evers, B.K. Robinson, P. Hinds, When in Rome: The role of culture & context in adherence to robot recommendations, in: Proceeding of the 5th international conference on human robot interaction (HRI), Osaka, Japan, ACM, New York, 2010, pp. 359-366.
[50]
M.M. Weil, L.D. Rosen, The psychological impact of technology from a global perspective: A study of technological sophistication and technophobia in university students from twenty-three countries, Computers in Human Behavior, 11 (1995) 95-133.
[51]
S. Woods, Exploring the design space of robots: Children's perspectives, Interacting with Computers, 18 (2006) 1390-1418.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers in Human Behavior
Computers in Human Behavior  Volume 40, Issue C
November 2014
190 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2014

Author Tags

  1. Age groups
  2. Children
  3. Cross-cultural differences
  4. Evaluation paradigm
  5. Robot
  6. iCat

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 22 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Measuring User Experience Inclusivity in Human-AI Interaction via Five User Problem-Solving StylesACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems10.1145/366374014:3(1-90)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
  • (2023)"Enjoy, but Moderately!": Designing a Social Companion Robot for Social Engagement and Behavior Moderation in Solitary Drinking ContextProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36100287:CSCW2(1-24)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2023
  • (2023)Let's Roll TogetherCompanion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3568294.3580130(476-480)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2023
  • (2022)Exploring the Affordances of Digital Toys for Young Children's Active PlayProceedings of the 34th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3572921.3572935(325-337)Online publication date: 29-Nov-2022
  • (2022)Socially Interactive Agents in GamesThe Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents10.1145/3563659.3563675(493-526)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
  • (2022)Sapling & the Travelling Forest: A table-top mobile robot platform for child-robot gamesProceedings of the 21st Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3501712.3535273(621-624)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2022
  • (2022)Comparison of In-home Robotic Companion Pet Use in South Korea and the United States: A Case Study2022 9th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference for Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob)10.1109/BioRob52689.2022.9925468(01-07)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2022
  • (2022)The Handbook on Socially Interactive AgentsundefinedOnline publication date: 27-Oct-2022
  • (2021)Robo LudensACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/345134310:4(1-28)Online publication date: 14-Jul-2021
  • (2020)Toy, Tutor, Peer, or Pet?Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3371382.3378315(325-327)Online publication date: 23-Mar-2020
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media