The Effects of Communication Style on Robot Navigation Performance

Cassenti, Daniel N.; Kelley, Troy D.; Swoboda, Jennifer C.; Patton, Debra J.

doi:10.1518/107118109x12524441081262

Cited by 5 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They were given a time limit of three minutes to complete each search. Cassenti et al (2009) found that participants performed slower when using free voice commands than manual controls, whereas the restricted verbal condition was no different than the control condition. Moratz et al (2003) and Tenbrink et al (2002) also found that their participants preferred using directions-only commands.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…A related question to be addressed below is how SS-RICS should be developed to facilitate better robot navigation performance. The present study acted as a follow-up to the study in Cassenti, Kelley, Swoboda, and Patton (2009), which was itself based heavily on Tenbrink, Fischer, and Moratz (2002) and Moratz, Tenbrink, Bateman, and Fischer (2003). All three of these studies focused on type of spatial language used to control robots.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All three of these studies focused on type of spatial language used to control robots. While Tenbrink et al (2002) and Moratz et al (2003) focused on subjective preferences for type of language, Cassenti et al (2009) focused on the performance resulting from the types of communication. Cassenti et al (2009) (a study similar to Luck, McDermott, Allender & Fisher, 2006) used a "Wizard of Oz" paradigm in which participants were instructed to control a robot while actually speaking to a confederate who acted out commands in a first person shooter gaming environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While Tenbrink et al (2002) and Moratz et al (2003) focused on subjective preferences for type of language, Cassenti et al (2009) focused on the performance resulting from the types of communication. Cassenti et al (2009) (a study similar to Luck, McDermott, Allender & Fisher, 2006) used a "Wizard of Oz" paradigm in which participants were instructed to control a robot while actually speaking to a confederate who acted out commands in a first person shooter gaming environment. The same environment was presented to both the confederate and each participant on two monitors linked to the same computer in two verbal control conditions, but not in a manual control condition in which the participant directly controlled the character.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Location Label Speech Options Improve Robot Operator Performance

Cassenti¹,

Kelley²,

Avery³

et al. 2011

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Operators increasingly use speech communication to direct robots. Thus, research on how robot operators may most effectively use speech communication is increasingly important. If certain types of speech communication increase performance then it is incumbent on robot designers to produce robots that allow for these types of communication. An experiment was conducted as a follow up to a previous experiment (Cassenti, Kelley, Swoboda, & Patton, 2009) to test whether participants who were given the ability to use certain location labels performed better than those who could only give direction commands (i.e., turn right, move forward). The results indicated that robot performance was improved when participants could direct a robot using location labels. We interpret these results to suggest that robots which are designed to perform indoor navigation have improved performance when participants can use location labels for structural parts of a building (i.e., doors, halls, and rooms with numerical labels). We recommend that the robotic platform used in the present study be developed to recognize these location labels by incorporating visual recognition algorithms and map incorporation skills.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Location Label Speech Options Improve Robot Operator Performance

Cassenti¹,

Kelley²,

Avery³

et al. 2011

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the current study, we also sought to evaluate whether individual differences in spatial ability, attentional control, and video gaming experience might affect the operator's performance. Spatial ability (SpA) has been found to be a significant factor in certain visual display domains (Stanney & Salvendy, 1995), multitasking involving flight asset monitoring and management (Morgan et al, 2011), virtual environment navigation (Chen, Czerwinski, & Macredie, 2000), target search task (Chen, 2010;Chen & Joyner, 2009;Chen & Terrence, 2008, and robotics task performance (Cassenti, Kelley, Swoboda, & Patton, 2009;Lathan & Tracey, 2002). U.S. Air Force scientists (Chappelle, McMillan, Novy, & McDonald, 2010;Chappelle, Novy, Randall, & McDonald, 2010) interviewed 53 subject matter experts about abilities that were critical to effective performance of UAS control tasks in terms of piloting and sensor operations; SpA was identified as an important factor for both tasks.…”

Section: Individual Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supervisory Control of Multiple Robots

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: A military multitasking environment was simulated to examine the effects of an intelligent agent, RoboLeader, on the performance of robotics operators.Background: The participants' task was to manage a team of ground robots with the assistance of RoboLeader, an intelligent agent capable of coordinating the robots and changing their routes on the basis of battlefield developments.Method: In the first experiment, RoboLeader was perfectly reliable; in the second experiment, RoboLeader's recommendations were manipulated to be either false-alarm prone or miss prone, with a reliability level of either 60% or 90%. The visual density of the targeting environment was manipulated by the presence or absence of friendly soldiers.Results: RoboLeader, when perfectly reliable, was helpful in reducing the overall mission times. The type of RoboLeader imperfection (false-alarm vs. miss prone) affected operators' performance of tasks involving visual scanning (target detection, route editing, and situation awareness). There was a consistent effect of visual density (clutter of the visual scene) for multiple performance measures. Participants' attentional control and video gaming experience affected their overall multitasking performance. In both experiments, participants with greater spatial ability consistently outperformed their low-spatial-ability counterparts in tasks that required effective visual scanning.Conclusion: Intelligent agents, such as RoboLeader, can benefit the overall human-robot teaming performance. However, the effects of type of agent unreliability, tasking requirements, and individual differences have complex effects on human-agent interaction.Application: The current results will facilitate the implementation of robots in military settings and will provide useful data to designs of systems for multirobot control.

show abstract