Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTrust as indicator of robot functional and social acceptance. An experimental study on user conformation to the iCubs answers
180
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Serena Ivaldi
Publication date
2015
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
To investigate the functional and social acceptance of a humanoid robot, we carried out an experimental study with 56 adult participants and the iCub robot. Trust in the robot has been considered as a main indicator of acceptance in decision-making tasks characterized by perceptual uncertainty (e.g., evaluating the weight of two objects) and socio-cognitive uncertainty (e.g., evaluating which is the most suitable item in a specific context), and measured by the participants conformation to the iCubs answers to specific questions. In particular, we were interested in understanding whether specific (i) user-related features (i.e. desire for control), (ii) robot-related features (i.e., attitude towards social influence of robots), and (iii) context-related features (i.e., collaborative vs. competitive scenario), may influence their trust towards the iCub robot. We found that participants conformed more to the iCubs answers when their decisions were about functional issues than when they were about social issues. Moreover, the few participants conforming to the iCubs answers for social issues also conformed less for functional issues. Trust in the robots functional savvy does not thus seem to be a pre-requisite for trust in its social savvy. Finally, desire for control, attitude towards social influence of robots and type of interaction scenario did not influence the trust in iCub. Results are discussed with relation to methodology of HRI research.
rate research
Read More
Trust is a critical issue in Human Robot Interactions as it is the core of human desire to accept and use a non human agent. Theory of Mind has been defined as the ability to understand the beliefs and intentions of others that may differ from ones own. Evidences in psychology and HRI suggest that trust and Theory of Mind are interconnected and interdependent concepts, as the decision to trust another agent must depend on our own representation of this entitys actions, beliefs and intentions. However, very few works take Theory of Mind of the robot into consideration while studying trust in HRI. In this paper, we investigated whether the exposure to the Theory of Mind abilities of a robot could affect humans trust towards the robot. To this end, participants played a Price Game with a humanoid robot that was presented having either low level Theory of Mind or high level Theory of Mind. Specifically, the participants were asked to accept the price evaluations on common objects presented by the robot. The willingness of the participants to change their own price judgement of the objects (i.e., accept the price the robot suggested) was used as the main measurement of the trust towards the robot. Our experimental results showed that robots possessing a high level of Theory of Mind abilities were trusted more than the robots presented with low level Theory of Mind skills.
Privacy-sensitive robotics is an emerging area of HRI research. Judgments about privacy would seem to be context-dependent, but none of the promising work on contextual frames has focused on privacy concerns. This work studies the impact of contextual frames on local users privacy judgments in a home telepresence setting. Our methodology consists of using an online questionnaire to collect responses to animated videos of a telepresence robot after framing people with an introductory paragraph. The results of four studies indicate a large effect of manipulating the robot operators identity between a stranger and a close confidante. It also appears that this framing effect persists throughout several videos. These findings serve to caution HRI researchers that a change in frame could cause their results to fail to replicate or generalize. We also recommend that robots be designed to encourage or discourage certain frames.
Autonomous cars can perform poorly for many reasons. They may have perception issues, incorrect dynamics models, be unaware of obscure rules of human traffic systems, or follow certain rules too conservatively. Regardless of the exact failure mode of the car, often human drivers around the car are behaving correctly. For example, even if the car does not know that it should pull over when an ambulance races by, other humans on the road will know and will pull over. We propose to make socially cohesive cars that leverage the behavior of nearby human drivers to act in ways that are safer and more socially acceptable. The simple intuition behind our algorithm is that if all the humans are consistently behaving in a particular way, then the autonomous car probably should too. We analyze the performance of our algorithm in a variety of scenarios and conduct a user study to assess peoples attitudes towards socially cohesive cars. We find that people are surprisingly tolerant of mistakes that cohesive cars might make in order to get the benefits of driving in a car with a safer, or even just more socially acceptable behavior.
Due to their unique persuasive power, language-capable robots must be able to both act in line with human moral norms and clearly and appropriately communicate those norms. These requirements are complicated by the possibility that humans may ascribe blame differently to humans and robots. In this work, we explore how robots should communicate in moral advising scenarios, in which the norms they are expected to follow (in a moral dilemma scenario) may be different from those their advisees are expected to follow. Our results suggest that, in fact, both humans and robots are judged more positively when they provide the advice that favors the common good over an individuals life. These results raise critical new questions regarding peoples moral responses to robots and the design of autonomous moral agents.
Social robots need intelligence in order to safely coexist and interact with humans. Robots without functional abilities in understanding others and unable to empathise might be a societal risk and they may lead to a society of socially impaired robots. In this work we provide a survey of three relevant human social disorders, namely autism, psychopathy and schizophrenia, as a means to gain a better understanding of social robots future capability requirements. We provide evidence supporting the idea that social robots will require a combination of emotional intelligence and social intelligence, namely socio-emotional intelligence. We argue that a robot with a simple socio-emotional process requires a simulation-driven model of intelligence. Finally, we provide some critical guidelines for designing future socio-emotional robots.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
