What Makes a Robot Social? A Review of Social Robots from Science Fiction to a Home or Hospital Near You

Henschel, Anna; Laban, Guy; Cross, Emily S.

doi:10.1007/s43154-020-00035-0

Cited by 130 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies that investigated individual differences, for example, have shown that individual differences in resting-state beta rhythms in the brain [11], experiencing loneliness [12], and expectations regarding the capabilities of robots can predict whether people would explain a robot's behavior in mentalistic or mechanistic terms [13]. Studies that investigated robot factors have shown that robots that are embodied [14], look humanlike [15], behave unexpectedly ( [10]), display variability in their behavior [16], or cheat [17], [18] are more likely to have their behaviors explained in mentalistic terms as opposed to mechanistic terms (For a review, see [19]). More recently, Lefkeli and colleagues [20], asked participants to play in cooperation with-or competition against a robot.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboratively framed interactions increase the adoption of intentional stance towards robots

Abubshait

Perez-Osorio

Tommaso

et al. 2021

2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot &Amp; Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When humans interact with artificial agents, they adopt various stances towards them. On one side of the spectrum, people might adopt a mechanistic stance towards an agent and explain its behavior using its functional properties. On the other hand, people can adopt the intentional stance towards artificial agents and explain their behavior using mentalistic terms and explain the agents' behavior using internal states (e.g., thoughts and feelings). While studies continue to investigate under which conditions people adopt the intentional stance towards artificial robots, here, we report a study in which we investigated the effect of social framing during a colorclassification task with a humanoid robot, iCub. One group of participants were asked to complete the task with iCub, in collaboration, while the other group completed an identical task with iCub and were told that they were completing the task for themselves. Participants completed a task assessing their level of adoption of the Intentional Stance (the InStance test) prior toand after completing the task. Results illustrate that participants who "collaborated" with iCub were more likely to adopt the intentional stance towards it after the interaction. These results suggest that social framing can be a powerful method to influence the stance that people adopt towards a robot.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboratively framed interactions increase the adoption of intentional stance towards robots

Abubshait

Perez-Osorio

Tommaso

et al. 2021

2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot &Amp; Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social robots hold great potential for delivering or improving psycho-social interventions (65), supporting mental health (68), monitoring symptoms of chronic pathologies (47), and providing much-needed physical and social support across a number of daily life settings (34). The recent COVID-19 pandemic further illuminated the potential of social robots as an assistive technology in times when strict infection control measures mandate physical distancing between people.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protocol for a Mediated Long-Term Experiment with a Social Robot

Laban¹,

Kappas²,

Morrison³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One major challenge faced by human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers is replicating and extending new findings, to better understand how short, constrained laboratory manipulations might translate to real-world scenarios. Since interactions with social robots are novel and exciting for many people, one particular concern is the extent to which people's behavioural and emotional engagement with robots might develop from initial interactions with a robot, when a robot's novelty is especially salient, and be sustained over time. The aim of this paper is to introduce a research protocol for a mediated long-term online experiment for testing the extent to which social robots’ cognitive architectures can elicit emotionally rich disclosures and expressions from people to identify their needs and emotional states over time. Moreover, this protocol introduces experimental methods for investigating people's perceptions of a social robot in their natural settings during prolonged and regular interactions, and evaluating how novelty effects on human-robot interactions change over time.

show abstract

“…Moreover, reflecting on relevant studies with other types of artificial agents and machines provides a meaningful context to the study of fallacious social robots. Social robots were previously found to have a genuine effect on people's decisions in a variety of contexts and settings (19). Social robots' influence on people's decisions is usually determined by the robot's available and related social cues, as well as people's expectations of the robot (58).…”

Section: Fallacious Artificial Agentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions with fallacious robots

Polakow¹,

Laban²,

Teodorescu³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of social robots as advisors for decision making is investigated. We examined how robot advisors, one with logical reasoning and one with cognitive fallacies, affected participants' decision making under different contexts. The participants were asked to make multiple decisions, while advice from both robots interleaved the decision making process. Participants had to choose which robot they agreed with, and in the end of the scenario, rank the possible options presented to them. After the interaction, participants were asked to assign roles to the robots, e.g. detective, bartender. Our results show that the robots had an effect on the participants' responses, wherein participants changed their decisions based on the robot they agreed with more. Moreover, the context, presented as two different scenarios, also had an effect on preferred robots, wherein an art auction scenario resulted in significantly increased agreement with the fallacious robot, whereas a detective scenario did not. Finally, personality traits, e.g. agreeableness and neuroticism, and attitudes towards robots, had an impact on which robot was assigned to these roles. Taken together, the results presented here shows that social robot's effects on participants' decision making are a complex interaction between context, robots' cognitive fallacies and participants' attitudes and personalities, and could not be considered as a single psychological construct.

show abstract

What Makes a Robot Social? A Review of Social Robots from Science Fiction to a Home or Hospital Near You

Cited by 130 publications

References 87 publications

Collaboratively framed interactions increase the adoption of intentional stance towards robots

Collaboratively framed interactions increase the adoption of intentional stance towards robots

Protocol for a Mediated Long-Term Experiment with a Social Robot

Interactions with fallacious robots

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About