Abstract
An increasing number of companion robots have started reaching the public in the recent years. These robots vary in their appearance and behavior. Since these two factors can have an impact on lasting human–robot relationships, it is important to understand their effect for companion robots.We have conducted an experiment that evaluated the impact of a robot’s appearance and its behaviour in repeated interactions on its perceived empathy, trustworthiness and anxiety experienced by a human. The results indicate that a highly humanlike robot is perceived as less trustworthy and empathic than a more machinelike robot. Moreover, negative behaviour of a machinelike robot reduces its trustworthiness and perceived empathy stronger than for highly humanlike robot. In addition, we found that a robot which disapproves of what a human says can induce anxiety felt towards its communication capabilities. Our findings suggest that more machinelike robots can be more suitable as companions than highly humanlike robots. Moreover, a robot disagreeing with a human interaction partner should be able to provide feedback on its understanding of the partner’s message in order to reduce her anxiety.
References
[1] C. D. Kidd and C. Breazeal, “Sociable robot systems for realworld problems,” vol. 2005 of Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 353–358, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2005. Search in Google Scholar
[2] M. Heerink, B. Krose, V. Evers, and B. Wielinga, “Influence of social presence on acceptance of an assistive social robot and screen agent by elderly users,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 23, no. 14, pp. 1909–1923, 2009. Search in Google Scholar
[3] B. Lee, “Empathy, androids and “authentic experience”,” Connection Science, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 419–428, 2006. 10.1080/09540090600868847Search in Google Scholar
[4] P. A. Hancock, D. R. Billings, K. E. Schaefer, J. Y. C. Chen, E. J. d. Visser, and R. Parasuraman, “A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction,” Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, vol. 53, pp. 517–527, Oct. 2011. 10.1177/0018720811417254Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[5] I. Leite, A. Pereira, G. Castellano, S. Mascarenhas, C. Martinho, and A. Paiva, “Modelling empathy in social robotic companions,” in UserModeling, Adaptation and Personalization Conference, UMAP 2011, vol. 7138 LNCS of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 135–147, Springer Verlag, 2012. Search in Google Scholar
[6] I. Leite, A. Pereira, S. Mascarenhas, G. Castellano, C. Martinho, R. Prada, and A. Paiva, “Closing the loop: From affect recognition to empathic interaction,” in 3rd ACMWorkshop on Affective Interaction in Natural Environments, pp. 43–47, Association for Computing Machinery, 2010. 10.1145/1877826.1877839Search in Google Scholar
[7] A. Tapus and M. J. Matarić, “Emulating empathy in socially assistive robotics,” in 2007 AAAI Spring Symposium, vol. SS-07- 07, pp. 93–96, American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 2007. Search in Google Scholar
[8] P. Hancock, D. Billings, and K. Schaefer, “Can you trust your robot?,” Ergonomics in Design, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 24–29, 2011. 10.1177/1064804611415045Search in Google Scholar
[9] M. Siegel, C. Breazeal, and M. I. Norton, “Persuasive robotics: The influence of robot gender on human behavior,” in 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IROS 2009, (St. Louis, MO, United states), pp. 2563 – 2568, 2009. Search in Google Scholar
[10] D. DeSteno, C. Breazeal, R. H. Frank, D. Pizarro, J. Baumann, L. Dickens, and J. J. Lee, “Detecting the trustworthiness of novel partners in economic exchange,” Psychological Science, vol. 23, pp. 1549–1556, Dec. 2012. Search in Google Scholar
[11] S. Brave, C. Nass, and K. Hutchinson, “Computers that care: investigating the effects of orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent,” International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, vol. 62, pp. 161–178, Feb. 2005. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2004.11.002Search in Google Scholar
[12] K. Dautenhahn, S. Woods, C. Kaouri, M. L. Walters, K. L. Koay, and I. Werry, “What is a robot companion - friend, assistant or butler?,” in IEEE IRS/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1488–1493, IEEE Computer Society, 2005. Search in Google Scholar
[13] K. E. Schaefer, T. L. Sanders, R. E. Yordon, D. R. Billings, and P. A. Hancock, “Classification of robot form: Factors predicting perceived trustworthiness,” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society AnnualMeeting, vol. 56, pp. 1548–1552, Sept. 2012. Search in Google Scholar
[14] M. L. Walters, D. S. Syrdal, K. Dautenhahn, R. Te Boekhorst, and K. L. Koay, “Avoiding the uncanny valley: Robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 159–178, 2008. 10.1007/s10514-007-9058-3Search in Google Scholar
[15] H. Cramer, J. Goddijn, B. Wielinga, and V. Evers, “Effects of (in)accurate empathy and situational valence on attitudes towards robots,” in 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 141–142, Association for Computing Machinery, 2010. 10.1109/HRI.2010.5453224Search in Google Scholar
[16] M. B. Mathur and D. B. Reichling, “An uncanny game of trust: Social trustworthiness of robots inferred from subtle anthropomorphic facial cues,” in Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI’09, (San Diego, CA, United states), pp. 313 – 314, 2008. 10.1145/1514095.1514192Search in Google Scholar
[17] L. D. Riek, T.-C. Rabinowitch, B. Chakrabarti, and P. Robinson, “How anthropomorphism affects empathy toward robots,” in Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI’09, (San Diego, CA, United states), pp. 245 – 246, 2008. 10.1145/1514095.1514158Search in Google Scholar
[18] C. Misselhorn, “Empathy with inanimate objects and the uncanny valley,” Minds and Machines, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 345–359, 2009. 10.1007/s11023-009-9158-2Search in Google Scholar
[19] M. A. Harrison and A. Hall, “Anthropomorphism, empathy, and perceived communicative ability varywith phylogenetic relatedness to humans,” Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, vol. 4, no. 1, 2010. 10.1037/h0099303Search in Google Scholar
[20] M. Coeckelbergh, “Can we trust robots?,” Ethics Inf Technol, vol. 14, pp. 53–60, Mar. 2012. 10.1007/s10676-011-9279-1Search in Google Scholar
[21] V. Evers, H. C. Maldonado, T. L. Brodecki, and P. J. Hinds, “Relational vs. group self-construal: Untangling the role of national culture in HRI,” in Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction: Living with Robots, (Amsterdam, Netherlands), pp. 255 – 262, 2008. 10.1145/1349822.1349856Search in Google Scholar
[22] J. P. Chaplin, ed., Dictionary of Psychology. Dell Publishing Company, 2nd ed., 1991. Search in Google Scholar
[23] M. Mori, “The uncanny valley,” Energy, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 33–35, 1970. Search in Google Scholar
[24] I. Leite, G. Castellano, A. Pereira, C. Martinho, and A. Paiva, “Modelling empathic behaviour in a robotic game companion for children: An ethnographic study in real-world settings,” in 7th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 367–374, Association for ComputingMachinery, 2012. 10.1145/2157689.2157811Search in Google Scholar
[25] A. Pereira, I. Leite, S. Mascarenhas, C. Martinho, and A. Paiva, “Using empathy to improve human-robot relationships,” in 3rd International Conference on Human-Robot Personal Relationships, vol. 59 LNICST, pp. 130–138, Springer Verlag, 2011. 10.1007/978-3-642-19385-9_17Search in Google Scholar
[26] I. Leite, S. Mascarenhas, A. Pereira, C. Martinho, R. Prada, and A. Paiva, “"why can’t we be friends?" an empathic game companion for long-term interaction,” in 10th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents, vol. 6356 LNAI, pp. 315–321, Springer Verlag, 2010. Search in Google Scholar
[27] Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan., “Comprehensive survey of living conditions of the people on health and welfare,” Tokyo (Japan): Health and Welfare Statistics Association, 2010. Search in Google Scholar
[In Japanese]. Search in Google Scholar
[28] M. Ono, M. Fujita, and S. Yamada, “Physiological and psychological responses to expressions of emotion and empathy in post-stress communication,” Journal of physiological anthropology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 29–35, 2009. 10.2114/jpa2.28.29Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[29] B. Reeves and C. Nass, The Media Equation. 1996. Search in Google Scholar
[30] T. Nomura, T. Kanda, T. Suzuki, and K. Kato, “Prediction of human behavior in human-robot interaction using psychological scales for anxiety and negative attitudes toward robots,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 24, pp. 442–451, Apr. 2008. 10.1109/TRO.2007.914004Search in Google Scholar
[31] R. Bakeman, “Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs,” Behavior research methods, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 379–384, 2005. 10.3758/BF03192707Search in Google Scholar
[32] L. Gong and C. Nass, “When a talking-face computer agent is half-human and half-humanoid: Human identity and consistency preference,” Human Communication Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 163–193, 2007. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00295.xSearch in Google Scholar
[33] R. K.Wilson and C. C. Eckel, “Judging a book by its cover: Beauty and expectations in the trust game,” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 59, pp. 189–202, June 2006. 10.1177/106591290605900202Search in Google Scholar
© 2016 Jakub Złotowski et al.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
