Understanding anthropomorphisation in social robotics

eng Article in English DOI:

send Karolina Zawieska *, Brian R. Duffy **, Agnieszka Sprońska * * Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP ** SMARTlab, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland

Download Article

Abstract

This paper discusses different approaches to anthropomorphism in social robotics. While anthropomorphisation in robotics is often understood as the human tendency to perceive robots as humanlike in response to stimuli provided by machines, the authors argue that it is also an interpretative process which is highly subjective and limited in duration. To project human characteristics onto robots means to attribute qualities that robots do not have. Thus, in order to understand the nature of user engagement in human-robot interaction, it is of crucial importance to have a clear understanding of anthropomorphism in the field of social robotics.

Keywords

anthropomorphism, Human-Robot Interaction, illusion of life, social robots, user engagement

Zrozumieć antropomorfizację robotów społecznych

Streszczenie

Artykuł przedstawia różne ujęcia antropomorfizmu w robotyce społecznej. Podczas gdy antropomorfizacja jest często rozumiana jako tendencja człowieka do przypisywania robotom cech ludzkich w odpowiedzi na bodźce dostarczone przez maszyny, autorzy niniejszej pracy twierdzą, że jest to także wysoce subiektywny proces interpretacyjny, którego trwanie jest ograniczone w czasie. Przypisywanie robotom właściwości ludzkich oznacza przypisywanie cech, których roboty nie posiadają. Z tego względu, dokładne zrozumienie antropomorfizacji w dziedzinie robotyki społecznej jest kluczowe dla zrozumienia sposobu, w jaki użytkownik angażuje się w interakcję z robotem.

Słowa kluczowe

antropomorfizacja, iluzja życia, interakcja człowiek-robot, robot społeczny, zaangażowanie użytkownika

Bibliography

  1. Aylett R.S., Castellano G., Raducanu B., Paiva A., Hanheide M., Long-term Socially Perceptive and Interactive Robot Companions: Challenges and Future Perspectives, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces 2011, ACM: Spain. 323-326.
  2. Bacon F., Novum Organum / the New Organon: The True Directions Concerning the Interpretation of Nature 1620/2009, Mobile Reference.
  3. Bargh J.A., Chen M., Burrows L., Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 1996, 71(2): 230-244.
  4. Bartneck C., Nomura T., Kanda T., Suzuki T., Kato K., A cross-cultural study on attitudes towards robots, Proceedings of the HCI International, 2005.
  5. Bartneck C., Croft E., Kulic D., Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots, Proceedings of the Metrics for Human-Robot Interaction Workshop in affiliation with the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2008.
  6. Baxter P., Beplaeme T., Cańamero L., Cosi P., Demiris Y., Enescu V., Long-Term Human-Robot Interaction with Young Users, IEEE/ACM HRI2011 Workshop on Robots Interacting with Children, 2011, Switzerland.
  7. Bell J., Puppets, Masks, and Performing Objects, 2001, MIT Press.
  8. Blumer H., Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, University of California Press, 1986
  9. Brooks R.A., Steps Towards Living Machines, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Evolutionary Robotics From Intelligent Robotics to Artificial Life 2001, Springer-Verlag, 72-93.
  10. Caporael L.R., Heyes C.M., Why anthropomorphize? Folk psychologies and other stories, [in:] Mitchell R.W., Thompson N.S., Miles H.L. (Editors) Anthropomorphism, anecdotes, and animals, State University of New York Press, 1997, 59-73.
  11. Cerulo K.A., Nonhumans in Social Interaction, “Annual Review of Sociology”, 2009. 35: 531-552.
  12. De La Mettrie J.O., Man a Machine 1748/2007, Wakeman Press.
  13. Duffy B.R., Anthropomorphism and Robotics, The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour, 2002, England.
  14. Duffy B.R., Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Special Issue on Socially Interactive Robots, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2003, 42(3-4), 177-190.
  15. Duffy B.R., Zawieska K. Suspension of Disbelief in Social Robotics. 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2012, France.
  16. Epley N., Waytz A., Cacioppo J.T., On Seeing a Human: A Three-Factory Theory of Anthropomorphism. “Psychological Review”, 2007, 114(4), 864-886.
  17. Epley N., Akalis S., Waytz A., Cacioppo J.T., Creating Social Connection Through Inferential Reproduction., Loneliness and Perceived Agency in Gadgets, Gods, and Greyhounds, “Psychological Science” 2008. 19: 114-120.
  18. Eyssel F.A., Kuchenbrandt D., Hegel F., de Ruiter L.. Activating elicited agent knowledge: How robot and user features shape the perception of social robots, Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication. France.
  19. Fussell S.R., Kiesler S., Setlock L.D., Yew V., How people anthropomorphize robots, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2008, ACM, The Netherlands, 145-152.
  20. Gockley R., Bruce A., Forlizzi J., Michalowski M., Mundell A., Rosenthal S., Sellner B., Simmons R., Snipes K., Schultz A.C., Wang J., Designing robots for long-term social interaction, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2005, Canada.
  21. Gray H., Gray K., Wegner D.M., Dimensions of mind perception. “Science”, 2007, 315(5812), 619.
  22. Gray K., Wegner D.M., Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley, “Cognition”, 2012,125, 145-152.
  23. Guthrie S.W., Faces in the Clouds: A New Theory of Religion, Oxford University Press, 1995, USA.
  24. Guthrie S.W., Anthropomorphism: A Definition and a Theory, [in:] Mitchell R.W., Thompson N.S., Miles H.L. (Editors), Anthropomorphism, Anecdotes and Animals, State University of New York Press, 1997, 50-58.
  25. Holland O., From the Imitation of Life to Machine Consciousness, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Evolutionary Robotics From Intelligent Robotics to Artificial Life, 2001, Springer-Verlag, 1-37.
  26. Horowitz A.C., Bekoff M., Naturalizing Anthropomorphism: Behavioral Prompts to Our Humanizing of Animals, “Anthrozoös”, 2007, 20(1), 23-35.
  27. Hume D., The Natural History Of Religion 1757/2004, Kessinger Publishing.
  28. Jeong-gun C., Myungsuk K., The Usage and Evaluation of Anthropomorphic Form in Robot Design, Undisciplined! Design Research Society Conference, 2008, UK.
  29. Kahn P.H., Ishiguro H., Friedman B., Kanda T., What is a Human? - Toward Psychological Benchmarks in the Field of Human-Robot Interaction, The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2006.
  30. Kahn P.H.J., Freier N.G., Friedman B., Severson R.L., Feldman E., Social and moral relationships with robotic others? IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004, Japan.
  31. Kee M.L., Park N., Song H., Can a Robot Be Perceived as a Developing Creature? Effects of a Robot’s Long-Term Cognitive Developments on Its Social Presence and People’s Social Responses Toward It, “Human Communication Research”, 2005, 31(4), 538-563.
  32. Kennedy J., The New Anthropomorphism 1992, Cambridge University Press.
  33. Kidd C.D., Breazeal C., Robots at Home: Understanding Long-Term Human-Robot Interaction, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systemts, 2008.
  34. Kiesler S., Goetz J., Mental models of robotic assistants, Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2002, ACM, USA, 576-577.
  35. Kiesler S., Fostering common ground in human-robot interaction, IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005, USA.
  36. Leite I., Martinho C., Pereira A., Paiva A., As Time goes by: Long-term evaluation of social presence in robotic companions. The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2009, Japan,
  37. Lesher J.H., Xenophanes of Colophon: Fragments: a Text and Translation with a Commentary, University of Toronto Press, 2001.
  38. Minato T., Shimada M., Itakura S., Lee K., Ishiguro H., Does Gaze Reveal the Human Likeness of an Android?, The 4th IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning, 2005, Japan.
  39. Morewedge C.K., Anthropomorphic God Concepts Engender Moral Judgement. “Social Cognition”, 2008. 26(2), 182-189.
  40. Nass C., Moon Y., Carney P., Are respondents polite to computers? Social desirability and direct responses to computers, “Journal of Applied Social Psychology”, 1999, 29(5), 1093-1110.
  41. Nass C., Moon Y., Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers, “Journal of Social Issues”, 2000, 56(1).
  42. Parise, S., Kiesler S., Sproull L., Waters K., Cooperating with life-like interface agents, “Computers in Human Behavior”, 1999, 15(2), 123-142.
  43. Severson R.L., Carlson S.M., Behaving as or behaving as if? Children’s conceptions of personified robots and the emergence of a new ontological category, “Neural Networks”, 2010, 23(8-9), 1099-1103.
  44. Shinozawa K., Reeves B., Wise K., Lim S., Maldonado H., Robots as New Media: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Social and Cognitive Responses to Robotic and On-Screen Agents, 53rd Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, 2002.
  45. Stack G.J., Nietzsche and Anthropomorphism. “Crítica”, 1980, 12(34), 41-71.
  46. Sussman M., Performing the Intelligent Machine. Deceprion and Enchantment in the Life of the Automaton Chess Player, [in:] Bell J. (Ed.), Puppets, Masks, and Performing Objects, 2001, MIT Press.
  47. Tillis S., Toward an Aesthetics of the Puppet: Puppetry As a Theatrical Art, 1992, Greenwood Press.
  48. Tillis S., Rethinking Folk Drama, 1999, Greenwood Press.
  49. Turkle S., A Nascent Robotics Culture: New Complicities for Companionship, AAAI Technical Report Series, 2006.
  50. Waytz A., Morewedge C.K., Epley N., Monteleone G., Jia-Hong G., Cacioppo J.T., Making Sense by Making Sentient: Effectance Motivation Increases Anthropomorphism, “Journal of Personality and Social Psychology”, 2010, 99(3), 410-435.
  51. Zawieska K., Ben Moussa M., Duffy B.R., Magnenat-Thalmann N., The role of imagination in Human-Robot Interaction, 25th Annual Conference on Computer Animation and Social Agents, Autonomous Social Robots and Virtual Humans Workshop, 2012, Singapore.