Towards a conceptual and methodological framework for determining robot believability

Interaction Studies

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 314-335

  Rose, Robert ^a   Scheutz, Matthias ^a   Schermerhorn, Paul ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Afect; Believability; Experimental methods; Human robot interaction; Interaction studies; Social interactions

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954627330     PISSN: 15720373     EISSN: 15720381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/is.11.2.21ros     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Arkin, R., Fujita, M., Takagi, T., & Hasegawa, R. (2003, March). An ethological and emotional basis for human-robot interaction. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42, 3-4.
2. Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Crof, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 71-81.
3. Bates, J. (1994, July). The role of emotion in believable agents. Communications of the ACM, 37(7), 122-125.
4. Breazeal, C., Wang, A., & Picard, R. (2007, March). Experiments with a Robotic Computer, Body, Afect and Cognition Interactions. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. Washington DC.
5. Breazeal, C. L. (2002). Designing sociable robots. MIT Press.
6. Cacioppo, J. T., & Tassinary, L. G. (1990, January). Inferring psychological signifcance from physiological signals. American Psychologist, 45(1), 16-28.
7. Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On Seeing Human: A Tree-Factor Teory of Anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864-886.
8. Friedman, B., Jr., P. H. K., & Hagman, J. (2003). Hardware companions?: what online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 273-280).
9. Hayes-Roth, B. (1995). Agents on stage: Advancing the state of the art of AI. In Proc 14th Int. Joint Conference on AI (pp. 967-971). Montreal.
10. Ho, C.-C., MacDorman, K., & Pramono, Z. A. D. (2008). Human Emotion and the Uncanny Valley: A GLM, MDS, and Isomap Analysis of Robot Video Ratings. In Proceedings of the Tird ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction.
11. Lester, J. C., & Stone, B. A. (1997). Increasing believability in animated pedagogical agents. W. L. Johnson B. Hayes-Roth (Eds), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents (pp. 16-21). Marina del Rey, CA, USA: ACM Press.
12. McCarthy, J. (1990). Ascribing mental qualities to machines. In Formalization of common sense. Ablex. (Originally published in 1979.).
13. Melson, G. F., Kahn, J., P H, Beck, A. M., Friedman, B., Roberts, T., & Garrett, E. (2005). Robots as dogs? - Children's interactions with the robotic dog AIBO and a live Australian Shepherd. In Extended Abstracts of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1649-1652). New York: ACM Press.
14. Michaud, F., & Audet, J. (2001). Using motives and artifcial emotion for long-term activity of an autonomous robot. In Proceedings of the 5th autonomous agents conference (pp. 188-189). Montreal, Quebec: ACM Press.
15. Murphy, R. R., Lisetti, C., Tardif, R., Irish, L., & Gage, A. (2002). Emotion-based control of cooperating heterogeneous mobile robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18(5), 744-757.
16. Norman, D. A. (2004). Emotional Design: Why We Love (or Hate) Everyday Tings. New York, NY: Basic Books.
17. Picard, R. W. (2001). Emotions in Humans and Artifacts. R. Trappl, P. Petta S. Payr (Eds.), (chap What Does it Mean for a Computer to "Have" Emotions?). MIT. (TR 534).
18. Picard, R. W., & Daily, S. B. (2005, April). Evaluating Afective Interactions: Alternatives to Asking What Users Feel. In CHI Workshop on Evaluating Afective Interfaces: Innovative Approaches. Portland, OR.
19. Powers, A. Kiesler, S. B. (2006). The advisor robot: tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes. In The Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 218-225).
20. Powers, A., Kiesler, S. B., Fussell, S. R. & Torrey, C. (2007). Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. In The Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 145-152).
21. Schermerhorn, P., Scheutz, M., & Crowell, C. (2008). Robot social presence and gender: do females view robots diferently than males? In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (p. 263-270).
22. Scheutz, M., Schermerhorn, P., Kramer, J., & Anderson, D. (2007, May). First steps toward natural human-like HRI. Autonomous Robots, 22(4), 411-423.
23. Scheutz, M., Schermerhorn, P., Kramer, J., & Middendorf, C. (2006). The utility of afect expression in natural language interactions in joint human-robot tasks. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 226-233).
24. Turkle, S. (2006, July). A Nascent Robotics Culture: New Complicities for Companionship (Tech. Rep). AAAI.
25. Walters, M. L., Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhahn, K., Boekhorst, R. te & Koay, K. L. (2008). Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attentionseeking home scenario for a robot companion. Autonomous Robots, 24, 159-178.
26. Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
27. Zeng, Z., Pantic, M., Roisman, G. I. & Huang, T. S. (2009, Jan). A survey of afect recognition methods: Audio, visual, and spontaneous expressions. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 31(1), 39-58.