Human-likeness of feedback gestures affects decision processes and subjective trust

Parenti, Lorenzo; Lukomski, Adam W.; Tommaso, Davide De; Belkaid, Marwen; Wykowska, Agnieszka

doi:10.31219/osf.io/py96r

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This presents a unique opportunity for social psychologists and cognitive neuroscientists. In fact, there has been a growing body of literature advocating for the use of robot-based paradigms to study various aspects of social cognition (Henschel et al, 2020;Wiese, Wykowska et al, 2017;Wykowska, 2021;Parenti et al, 2021a). Among the benefits argued for in this approach are the controllability of robots and their ability to physically interact with the environment allowing for rich real-time interactions (Parenti et al, 2021a).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differences in social expectations about robot signals and human signals

Parenti¹,

Belkaid²,

Wykowska³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision-making processes are involved in a large portion of humans’ everyday life and often occur in social situations. Although social decision-making has received increasing interest in literature, the influence of communicative signals, like social cues and feedback, on social decision-making is still poorly understood. In particular, the issue of whether social signals exhibited by non-human agents influence decision making has not yet been addressed. This question is of great importance today, in the new era in which artificial agents, such as robots or avatars start interacting with humans on a daily basis. This study aimed to examine whether robot non-verbal communicative behavior has an effect on human decision-making and can be perceived as a social signal. To this end, we implemented a 2-alternative-choice task with a between-subjects design where a robot acted as a game partner. We manipulated robot’s cues before participant’s decision and robot’s feedback after the decision. We found that manipulating robot signals affected participants’ performance. In particular, participants were slower in the condition where cues were mostly invalid and the robot reacted positively to wins. We show that this effect could not be attributed to attentional mechanisms, feedback expectation, or cognitive control. Instead, our results suggest that the effect is rather due to the violation of expectations about the incongruence between social signals. Our findings also indicate differences in these social expectations when they are about robot signals compared to human signals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of decision-making, it is important to consider that social signals may be received either before or after a decision is made (Parenti et al, 2021a). In the former case, a non-verbal signal can serve as a cue or advice and inform predictions about possible decision outcomes to help select an action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in social expectations about robot signals and human signals

Parenti¹,

Belkaid²,

Wykowska³

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the context of decision‐making, it is important to consider that social signals may be received either before or after a decision is made (Parenti et al., 2021a). In the former case, a non‐verbal signal can serve as a cue or advice and inform predictions about possible decision outcomes to help select an action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in Social Expectations About Robot Signals and Human Signals

Parenti,

Belkaid,

Wykowska

2023

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In our daily lives, we are continually involved in decision‐making situations, many of which take place in the context of social interaction. Despite the ubiquity of such situations, there remains a gap in our understanding of how decision‐making unfolds in social contexts, and how communicative signals, such as social cues and feedback, impact the choices we make. Interestingly, there is a new social context to which humans are recently increasingly more frequently exposed—social interaction with not only other humans but also artificial agents, such as robots or avatars. Given these new technological developments, it is of great interest to address the question of whether—and in what way—social signals exhibited by non‐human agents influence decision‐making. The present study aimed to examine whether robot non‐verbal communicative behavior has an effect on human decision‐making. To this end, we implemented a two‐alternative‐choice task where participants were to guess which of two presented cups was covering a ball. This game was an adaptation of a “Shell Game.” A robot avatar acted as a game partner producing social cues and feedback. We manipulated robot's cues (pointing toward one of the cups) before the participant's decision and the robot's feedback (“thumb up” or no feedback) after the decision. We found that participants were slower (compared to other conditions) when cues were mostly invalid and the robot reacted positively to wins. We argue that this was due to the incongruence of the signals (cue vs. feedback), and thus violation of expectations. In sum, our findings show that incongruence in pre‐ and post‐decision social signals from a robot significantly influences task performance, highlighting the importance of understanding expectations toward social robots for effective human–robot interactions.

show abstract

Human-likeness of feedback gestures affects decision processes and subjective trust

Cited by 2 publications

References 26 publications

Differences in social expectations about robot signals and human signals

Differences in social expectations about robot signals and human signals

Differences in Social Expectations About Robot Signals and Human Signals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About