'Who's Johnny?' Anthropomorphic Framing in Human-Robot Interaction, Integration, and Policy

Darling, Kate

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2588669

Cited by 91 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The overall high mean scores of humanness above three on a one to five point Likert scale in the current study support this presumption. Surprisingly, and contrary to previous findings (Darling, 2017;Nijssen et al, 2019;Riek et al, 2009), more participants in the functional, not anthropomorphic, condition were willing to donate their money for the robot repair (18 out of 20). Therefore, the results do not support the assumption that anthropomorphism is always beneficial in HRI.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Besides the anthropomorphic design of a robot´s appearance and behavior, the phenomenon of anthropomorphism can also be induced by framing. There are different ways to frame social robots anthropomorphic such as giving them human names (Keay & Graduand, 2011) or personified stories (Darling, 2017). Darling, Nandy and Breazeal (2015) used both for an experiment with an insect robot called Hexbug Nano to investigate the link between anthropomorphic framing and the willingness to destroy a robot.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Anthropomorphizing Robots: The Effect of Framing in Human-Robot Collaboration

Onnasch

Roesler

2019

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropomorphic framing of social robots is widely believed to facilitate human-robot interaction. In two subsequent studies, the impact of anthropomorphic framing was examined regarding the subjective perception of a robot and the willingness to donate money for this robot. In both experiments, participants received either an anthropomorphic or a functional description of a humanoid NAO robot prior to a cooperative task. Afterwards the perceived robot's humanlike perception and the willingness to "save" the robot from malfunctioning were assessed (donation behavior). Surprisingly, the first study revealed a negative effect of anthropomorphic framing on the willingness to donate. This negative effect disappeared if the robot's functional value for the task fulfillment was additionally made explicit (Study 2). In both studies, no effect of anthropomorphic framing on the humanlike perception of the robot was found. However, the behavioral results support the relevance of a functional awareness in social human-robot interaction.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropomorphizing Robots: The Effect of Framing in Human-Robot Collaboration

Onnasch

Roesler

2019

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been shown that individuals show more empathy toward more anthropomorphic robots (Riek et al, 2009;Darling, 2015). Convincing simulation of humanlike hand and eye movements may induce implicit impressions of animacy and anthropomorphism, potentially attributing greater value and pleasure to robotic art through empathic responses (Bartneck et al, 2009).…”

Section: The Importance Of Embodiment In Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Putting the art in artificial: Aesthetic responses to computer-generated art.

Chamberlain¹,

Mullin²,

Scheerlinck³

et al. 2018

Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts

103

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As artificial intelligence (AI) technology increasingly becomes a feature of everyday life, it is important to understand how creative acts, regarded as uniquely human, can be valued if produced by a machine. The current studies sought to investigate how observers respond to works of visual art created either by humans or by computers. Study 1 tested observers' ability to discriminate between computer-generated and man-made art, and then examined how categorisation of art works impacted on perceived aesthetic value, revealing a bias against computer-generated art. In Study 2 this bias was reproduced in the context of robotic art, however it was found to be reversed when observers were given the opportunity to see robotic artists in action. These findings reveal an explicit prejudice against computergenerated art, driven largely by the kind of art observers believe computer algorithms are capable of producing. These prejudices can be overridden in circumstances in which observers are able to infer anthropomorphic characteristics in the computer programs, a finding which has implications for the future of artistic AI.

show abstract

“…These robots have developed in divergent ways that reflect the values and concerns of their engineers, illustrating a divide in the field. There is a community of scientists who argue that robots must not look humanlike until their intelligence can match that of humans (Darling, 2017). In parallel, leading researchers in Korea and Japan have created some of the most human-like socially interactive robots to date.…”

Section: Neuroethics Questions For Neuroscientistsmentioning

confidence: 99%