More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Impact of Multi-Robot Presence and Anthropomorphism on Human Cognition and Emotion

Authors:

Veronika Domova,

Lawrence H KimAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Article No.: 594, Pages 1 - 15

https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642795

Published: 11 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Exploring how robots impact human cognition and emotions has become increasingly important as robots gradually become ubiquitous in our lives. In this study, we investigate the impact of robotic presence on human cognition and emotion by examining various robot parameters such as anthropomorphism, number of robots, and multi-robot motion patterns. 16 participants completed two cognitive tasks in the presence of anthropomorphic and non-anthropomorphic robots, alone, and with a human nearby. The non-anthropomorphic robot conditions were further varied in the number of robots and their motion patterns. We find that increasing the number of non-anthropomorphic robots generally leads to slower performance, but coordinated patterned motions can lower the completion time compared to random movements. An anthropomorphic robot induces an increased level of feelings of being judged compared to a non-anthropomorphic robot. These findings provide preliminary insights into how designers or users can purposefully integrate robots into our environment by understanding the effects of anthropomorphism, number of robots, and multi-robot motion patterns on human cognition and emotion.

Supplemental Material

MP4 File - Video Preview

Video Preview

Download
6.42 MB

MP4 File - Video Presentation

Video Presentation

Transcript for: Video Presentation

References

[1]

Wilma Bainbridge, Justin Hart, Elizabeth Kim, and Brian Scassellati. 2011. The Benefits of Interactions with Physically Present Robots over Video-Displayed Agents. I. J. Social Robotics 3 (10 2011), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0082-7

[2]

Robert S. Baron. 1986. Distraction-Conflict Theory: Progress and Problems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 19. Academic Press, 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60211-7

[3]

Robert S. Baron, Danny L. Moore, and Glenn S. Sanders. 1978. Distraction as a Source of Drive in Social Facilitation Research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 36 (1978), 816–824. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:145655813

[4]

Sian Beilock, Catherine Kulp, Lauren Holt, and Thomas Carr. 2004. More on the Fragility of Performance: Choking Under Pressure in Mathematical Problem Solving. Journal of experimental psychology. General 133 (12 2004), 584–600. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.584

[5]

Seymour M Berger, Katherine L Hampton, Linda L Carli, Paul S Grandmaison, Janice S Sadow, Clifford H Donath, and Laura R Herschlag. 1981. Audience-induced inhibition of overt practice during learning.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40, 3 (1981), 479.

[6]

Charles Bond and Linda Titus. 1983. Social facilitation: A meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological bulletin 94 (10 1983), 265–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.94.2.265

[7]

Margaret M. Bradley and Peter J. Lang. 1994. Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 25, 1 (1994), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9

[8]

Daniel Brown and Michael Goodrich. 2014. Limited bandwidth recognition of collective behaviors in bio-inspired swarms. 13th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS 2014 1 (01 2014), 405–412.

[9]

Michael Chui, James Manyika, and Mehdi Miremadi. 2016. Where machines could replace humans-and where they can’t (yet). (2016).

[10]

Soon-Jo Chung, Aditya Paranjape, Philip Dames, Shaojie Shen, and Vijay Kumar. 2018. A Survey on Aerial Swarm Robotics. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 34 (07 2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2018.2857475

Digital Library

[11]

Geoffrey Collier. 1996. Affective synesthesia: Extracting emotion space from simple perceptual stimuli1. Motivation and Emotion 20 (01 1996), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02251005

[12]

NICKOLAS COTTRELL, Dennis Wack, GARY SEKERAK, and Robert Rittle. 1968. Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audience and the mere presence of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology - PSP 9 (08 1968), 245–250. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025902

[13]

Kerstin Dautenhahn, Bernard Ogden, and Tom Quick. 2002. From embodied to socially embedded agents – Implications for interaction-aware robots. Cognitive Systems Research 3, 3 (2002), 397–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0417(02)00050-5 Situated and Embodied Cognition.

Digital Library

[14]

Griffin Dietz, Jane L. E, Peter Washington, Lawrence H. Kim, and Sean Follmer. 2017. Human Perception of Swarm Robot Motion. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI EA ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2520–2527. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3053220

Digital Library

[15]

Marco Dorigo, Guy Theraulaz, and Vito Trianni. 2020. Reflections on the future of swarm robotics. Science Robotics 5, 49 (2020), eabe4385. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.abe4385 arXiv:https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/scirobotics.abe4385

[16]

Anca D. Dragan, Shira Bauman, Jodi Forlizzi, and Siddhartha S. Srinivasa. 2015. Effects of Robot Motion on Human-Robot Collaboration. In 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 51–58.

[17]

Paul Ekman. 1993. Facial Expression and Emotion. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:260507272

[18]

Marlena. R. Fraune, Steven Sherrin, Selma Šabanović, and Eliot R. Smith. 2015. Rabble of Robots Effects: Number and Type of Robots Modulates Attitudes, Emotions, and Stereotypes. In 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 109–116.

Digital Library

[19]

David Gouaillier, Vincent Hugel, Pierre Blazevic, Chris Kilner, Jérôme Monceaux, Pascal Lafourcade, Brice Marnier, Julien Serre, and Bruno Maisonnier. 2009. Mechatronic design of NAO humanoid. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 769 – 774. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2009.5152516

[20]

Georg Graetz and Guy Michaels. 2018. Robots at Work. The Review of Economics and Statistics 100, 5 (2018), 753–768. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tpr:restat:v:100:y:2018:i:5:p:753-768

[21]

Jeong Han, Miheon Jo, Vicki Jones, and Jun Jo. 2008. Comparative Study on the Educational Use of Home Robots for Children. JIPS 4 (12 2008), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.3745/JIPS.2008.4.4.159

[22]

D. O. Hebb. 1955. Drives and the C. N. S. (Conceptual Nervous System). Psychological Review 62, 4 (1955), 243–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0041823

[23]

Fritz Heider and Marianne Simmel. 1944. An experimental study of apparent behavior. The American journal of psychology 57, 2 (1944), 243–259.

[24]

Fritz Heider and Marianne L. Simmel. 1944. An experimental study of apparent behavior. American Journal of Psychology 57 (1944), 243–259. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:143057281

[25]

Abdelfetah Hentout, Mustapha Aouache, Abderraouf Maoudj, and Isma Akli. 2019. Human–robot interaction in industrial collaborative robotics: a literature review of the decade 2008–2017. Advanced Robotics 33, 15-16 (2019), 764–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/01691864.2019.1636714 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/01691864.2019.1636714

[26]

Agneta Herlitz and Johanna Lovén. 2013. Sex differences and the own-gender bias in face recognition: A meta-analytic review. Visual Cognition 21, 9-10 (2013), 1306–1336. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.823140 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.823140

[27]

Miles Hewstone, Mark Rubin, and Hazel Willis. 2002. Intergroup Bias. Annual Review of Psychology 53, 1 (2002), 575–604. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109PMID: 11752497.

[28]

Jerome Himelhoch. 1968. Foundations of Social Psychology. Social Forces 47, 2 (12 1968), 248–249. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/47.2.248

[29]

Yutaka Hiroi and Akinori Ito. 2008. Are Bigger Robots Scary? - The Relationship Between Robot Size and Psychological Threat -. IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, AIM, 546 – 551. https://doi.org/10.1109/AIM.2008.4601719

[30]

Peter J. Hunt and Joseph M. Hillery. 1973. Social facilitation in a coaction setting: An examination of the effects over learning trials. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9, 6 (1973), 563–571. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(73)90038-3

[31]

Matthew A. Joordens and Mo Jamshidi. 2010. Consensus Control for a System of Underwater Swarm Robots. IEEE Systems Journal 4, 1 (2010), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSYST.2010.2040225

[32]

Sean Kerman, Daniel Brown, and Michael Goodrich. 2012. Supporting human interaction with robust robot swarms. 197–202. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISRCS.2012.6309318

[33]

Lawrence H. Kim, Veronika Domova, Yuqi Yao, Chien-Ming Huang, Sean Follmer, and Pablo E. Paredes. 2022. Robotic Presence: The Effects of Anthropomorphism and Robot State on Task Performance and Emotion. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 7, 3 (2022), 7399–7406. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2022.3181726

[34]

Lawrence H Kim, Veronika Domova, Yuqi Yao, and Pablo E Paredes. 2022. Effects of a Co-Located Robot and Anthropomorphism on Human Motivation and Emotion across Personality and Gender. In 2022 31st IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, 155–162.

Digital Library

[35]

Lawrence H Kim, Veronika Domova, Yuqi Yao, and Parsa Rajabi. 2023. SwarmFidget: Exploring Programmable Actuated Fidgeting with Swarm Robots. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 1–15.

Digital Library

[36]

Lawrence H. Kim and Sean Follmer. 2017. UbiSwarm: Ubiquitous Robotic Interfaces and Investigation of Abstract Motion as a Display. Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 1, 3, Article 66 (sep 2017), 20 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3130931

Digital Library

[37]

Lawrence H Kim and Sean Follmer. 2019. Swarmhaptics: Haptic display with swarm robots. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.

Digital Library

[38]

Dieta Kuchenbrandt, Friederike Eyssel, Simon Bobinger, and Maria Neufeld. 2013. When a Robot’s Group Membership Matters. International Journal of Social Robotics 5 (08 2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0197-8

[39]

T Kushnir and KD Duncan. 1978. An analysis of social facilitation effects in terms of signal detection theory. The Psychological Record. 28 (1978), 535–541.

[40]

Mathieu Le Goc, Lawrence H Kim, Ali Parsaei, Jean-Daniel Fekete, Pierre Dragicevic, and Sean Follmer. 2016. Zooids: Building blocks for swarm user interfaces. In Proceedings of the 29th annual symposium on user interface software and technology. 97–109.

Digital Library

[41]

Jong-Hoon Lee, Jin-Yung Park, and Tek-Jin Nam. 2007. Emotional Interaction Through Physical Movement, Vol. 4552. 401–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73110-8_43

[42]

Kwan Min Lee, Younbo Jung, Jaywoo Kim, and Sang Ryong Kim. 2006. Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people’s loneliness in human–robot interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64, 10 (2006), 962–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.002

Digital Library

[43]

Jamy Li. 2015. The benefit of being physically present: A survey of experimental works comparing copresent robots, telepresent robots and virtual agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 77 (2015), 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.001

Digital Library

[44]

Jiatong Li, Ryo Suzuki, and Ken Nakagaki. 2023. Physica: Interactive Tangible Physics Simulation based on Tabletop Mobile Robots Towards Explorable Physics Education. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1485–1499.

Digital Library

[45]

Yuhua Liang and Seungcheol Lee. 2017. Fear of Autonomous Robots and Artificial Intelligence: Evidence from National Representative Data with Probability Sampling. International Journal of Social Robotics 9 (06 2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0401-3

[46]

C. Macrae and Galen Bodenhausen. 2000. Social Cognition: Thinking Categorically about Others. Annual review of psychology 51 (02 2000), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.93

[47]

Elena Mascalzoni, Lucia Regolin, and Giorgio Vallortigara. 2010. Innate sensitivity for self-propelled causal agency in newly hatched chicks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 9 (2010), 4483–4485.

[48]

Albert Mehrabian. 1980. Basic Dimensions for a General Psychological Theory: Implications for Personality, Social, Environmental, and Developmental Studies. Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, Cambridge.

[49]

E. Meumann. 1904. Haus- und schularbeit: experimente an kindern der volksschule. J. Klinkhardt. https://books.google.ca/books?id=8ykBAAAAYAAJ

[50]

Omar Mubin, Catherine J Stevens, Suleman Shahid, Abdullah Al Mahmud, and Jian-Jie Dong. 2013. A review of the applicability of robots in education. Journal of Technology in Education and Learning 1, 209-0015 (2013), 13.

[51]

Manisha Natarajan and Matthew Gombolay. 2020. Effects of Anthropomorphism and Accountability on Trust in Human Robot Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, United Kingdom) (HRI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 33–42. https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374839

Digital Library

[52]

Iñaki Navarro and Fernando Matia. 2013. An Introduction to Swarm Robotics. ISRN Robotics 2013 (01 2013). https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/608164

[53]

Raquel Oliveira, Patricia Arriaga, and Ana Paiva. 2021. Human-Robot Interaction in Groups: Methodological and Research Practices. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 5 (09 2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5100059

[54]

Ayberk Özgür, Séverin Lemaignan, Wafa Johal, Maria Beltran, Manon Briod, Léa Pereyre, Francesco Mondada, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2017. Cellulo: Versatile handheld robots for education. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 119–127.

Digital Library

[55]

Sung Park and Richard Catrambone. 2007. Social Facilitation Effects of Virtual Humans. Human Factors 49, 6 (2007), 1054–1060. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X249910 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X249910PMID: 18074704.

[56]

Marina Pavlova, Arseny A Sokolov, and Alexander Sokolov. 2005. Perceived Dynamics of Static Images Enables Emotional Attribution. Perception 34, 9 (2005), 1107–1116. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5400 16247880.

[57]

Elizabeth Phillips, Xuan Zhao, Daniel Ullman, and Bertram F. Malle. 2018. What is Human-like? Decomposing Robots’ Human-like Appearance Using the Anthropomorphic RoBOT (ABOT) Database. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Chicago, IL, USA) (HRI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171268

Digital Library

[58]

Gaëtan Podevijn, Rehan O’grady, Nithin Mathews, Audrey Gilles, Carole Fantini-Hauwel, and Marco Dorigo. 2016. Investigating the effect of increasing robot group sizes on the human psychophysiological state in the context of human–swarm interaction. Swarm Intelligence 10 (2016), 193–210.

[59]

Frank E. Pollick, Helena M. Paterson, Armin Bruderlin, and Anthony J. Sanford. 2001. Perceiving Affect From Arm Movement. Cognition 82, 2 (2001), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00147-0

[60]

Jonathan Posner, James A. Russell, and Bradley S. Peterson. 2005. The circumplex model of affect: An integrative approach to affective neuroscience, cognitive development, and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology 17 (2005), 715 – 734. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:4827868

[61]

Zhihua Qu, Jing Wang, and Richard A. Hull. 2008. Cooperative Control of Dynamical Systems With Application to Autonomous Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 53, 4 (2008), 894–911. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.2008.920232

[62]

Maria G. Rewakowicz. 2014. Chapter 10. Literary New York: The New York Group and Beyond. Academic Studies Press, Boston, USA, 209–227. https://doi.org/

[63]

Nina Riether, Frank Hegel, Britta Wrede, and Gernot Horstmann. 2012. Social facilitation with social robots?. In 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 41–47. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157689.2157697

Digital Library

[64]

Bernard Rimé, Bernadette Boulanger, Philippe Laubin, Marc Richir, and Kathleen Stroobants. 1985. The perception of interpersonal emotions originated by patterns of movement. Motivation and Emotion 9 (01 1985), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991830

[65]

James Russell. 1980. A Circumplex Model of Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (12 1980), 1161–1178. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0077714

[66]

Martin Saerbeck and Christoph Bartneck. 2010. Perception of affect elicited by robot motion. In 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2010.5453269

[67]

María Santos and Magnus Egerstedt. 2020. From Motions to Emotions: Can the Fundamental Emotions be Expressed in a Robot Swarm?arxiv:1903.12118 [cs.RO]

[68]

Sony. [n. d.]. Toy platform toio. https://www.sony.com/en/SonyInfo/design/stories/toio/

[69]

Bernd Strauss. 2002. Social facilitation in motor tasks: a review of research and theory. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 3, 3 (2002), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1469-0292(01)00019-X

[70]

Ying Tan and Zhong yang Zheng. 2013. Research Advance in Swarm Robotics. Defence Technology 9, 1 (2013), 18–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2013.03.001

[71]

Toumi Tarek and Abdelmadjid Zidani. 2014. From Human-Computer Interaction to Human-Robot Social Interaction. (12 2014).

[72]

J.C. Turner and Katherine Reynolds. 2012. Self-categorization theory. 399–417. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n46

[73]

Joshua Wainer, David Feil-Seifer, Dylan Shell, and Maja Mataric. 2006. The role of physical embodiment in human-robot interaction. IEEE Proceedings of the International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 117 – 122. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314404

[74]

Phillip Walker, Michael Lewis, and Katia Sycara. 2016. Characterizing human perception of emergent swarm behaviors. 002436–002441. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2016.7844604

Digital Library

[75]

Ina Wechsung, Patrick Ehrenbrink, Robert Schleicher, and Sebastian Möller. 2012. Investigating the Social Facilitation Effect in Human-Robot Interaction. In Natural Interaction with Robots, Knowbots and Smartphones, Putting Spoken Dialog Systems into Practice. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:22276086

[76]

David A. Wilder. 1977. Perception of groups, size of opposition, and social influence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13, 3 (1977), 253–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(77)90047-6

[77]

Travis J. Wiltshire and Stephen M. Fiore. 2014. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience in Human–Machine Systems: A Roadmap for Improving Training, Human–Robot Interaction, and Team Performance. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 44, 6 (2014), 779–787. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2343996

[78]

Jacob D. Dodson Yerkes, R. M.1915. The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation in the kitten.Journal of Animal Behavior 5 (1915), 330–336. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:15839945

[79]

Kumar Yogeeswaran, Jakub Złotowski, Megan Livingstone, Christoph Bartneck, Hidenobu Sumioka, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2016. The Interactive Effects of Robot Anthropomorphism and Robot Ability on Perceived Threat and Support for Robotics Research. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 5, 2 (sep 2016), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.5.2.Yogeeswaran

Digital Library

[80]

H. D. Yoo and S. M. Chankov. 2018. Drone-delivery Using Autonomous Mobility: An Innovative Approach to Future Last-mile Delivery Problems. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM). 1216–1220. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2018.8607829

[81]

Robert B. Zajonc. 1965. Social Facilitation. Science 149, 3681 (1965), 269–274. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3681.269 arXiv:https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.149.3681.269

[82]

Yuecheng Zhang and Liang Cheng. 2004. A Distributed Protocol for Multi-hop Underwater Robot Positioning. In 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics. 480–484. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2004.1521826

[83]

Jakub Zlotowski, Ewald Strasser, and Christoph Bartneck. 2014. Dimensions of anthropomorphism: From humanness to humanlikeness. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559679

Digital Library

Cited By

Pulatova SKim L(2024)Co-Designing Programmable Fidgeting Experience with Swarm Robots for Adults with ADHDProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3675614(1-14)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663548.3675614

Index Terms

Impact of Multi-Robot Presence and Anthropomorphism on Human Cognition and Emotion

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

Effects of robot-human versus robot-robot behavior and entitativity on anthropomorphism and willingness to interact
Abstract
As robots become prevalent, people are increasingly interacting with multiple robots at once. Thus, it is important to not only examine how robot behavior toward humans affects interaction, but how robot behavior toward other robots ...
Highlights
- Social robot behavior toward robots increased anthropomorphism of robots.
- ...
Anthropomorphism and Human Likeness in the Design of Robots and Human-Robot Interaction
Social Robotics
Abstract
In this literature review we explain anthropomorphism and its role in the design of socially interactive robots and human-robot interaction. We illustrate the social phenomenon of anthropomorphism which describes people’s tendency to attribute ...
Priming Anthropomorphism: Can the credibility of humanlike robots be transferred to non-humanlike robots?
HRI '16: The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction

We investigated the perceived credibility of statements made by robots, hypothesising that people are more likely to believe robots with humanlike characteristics than those that are less anthropomorphic. We also examined whether prior experience with a ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 2024

18961 pages

ISBN:9798400703300

DOI:10.1145/3613904

Editors:
Florian Floyd Mueller
Monash University
,
Penny Kyburz
The Australian National University
,
Julie R. Williamson
University of Glasgow
,
Corina Sas
Lancaster University
,
Max L. Wilson
University of Nottingham
,
Phoebe Toups Dugas
Monash University/New Mexico State University
,
Irina Shklovski
University of Copenhagen

Copyright © 2024 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 May 2024

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Funding Sources

Conference

CHI '24

Sponsor:

CHI '24: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 11 - 16, 2024

HI, Honolulu, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Upcoming Conference

CHI 2025

Sponsor:
sigchi

ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 26 - May 1, 2025

Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
907
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)907
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)135

Reflects downloads up to 12 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Pulatova SKim L(2024)Co-Designing Programmable Fidgeting Experience with Swarm Robots for Adults with ADHDProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3675614(1-14)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3663548.3675614

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View full text|Download PDF

View Table of Contents