Measuring the Quality of Interaction in Mobile Robotic Telepresence: A Pilot's Perspective

International Journal of Social Robotics

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 89-101

  Kristoffersson, Annica ^a   Severinson Eklundh, Kerstin ^b   Loutfi, Amy ^a  

^a ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

F formations; Methodology; Mobile robotic telepresence; Presence; Quality of interaction; Telepresence

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL ROBOTS; SOCIAL ROBOTS; SURVEYS; VISUAL COMMUNICATION;

F-FORMATION; METHODOLOGY; PRESENCE; QUALITY OF INTERACTION; TELEPRESENCE;

ROBOTICS;

EID: 84872555676     PISSN: 18754791     EISSN: 18754805     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12369-012-0166-7     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adalgeirsson SO (2009) Mebot: a robotic platform for socially embodied presence. Master's thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
2. Adalgeirsson SO, Breazeal C (2010) Mebot: a robotic platform for socially embodied presence. In: Proceedings of HRI 2010, pp 15-22.
3. Argyle M, Dean J (1965) Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry 28: 3.
4. Beer JM, Takayama L (2011) Mobile remote presence systems for older adults: acceptance, benefits, and concerns. In: Proceedings of HRI 2011, pp 19-26.
5. Biocca F, Harms C (2011) Guide to the networked minds social presence inventory. http://cogprints. org/6743/. Accessed 6 November 2011.
6. Biocca F, Harms C (2011) Networked minds social presence inventory (scales only version 1. 2). Tech. rep, M. I. N. D. Labs, Michigan State University, Michigan, USA (2002). http://cogprints. org/6742/. Accessed 6 November 2011.
7. Cohen B, Lanir J, Stone R, Gurevich P (2011) Requirements and design considerations for a fully immersive robotic telepresence system. In: Proceedings of HRI 2011 workshop on social robotic telepresence, pp 16-22.
8. Giraff: http://www. giraff. org. Accessed 6 Nov 2011.
9. Gottdiener M (1979) Field research and video tape. Sociol Inq 49(4): 59-66.
10. Hall ET (1966) The hidden dimension: man's use of space in public and private. Bodley Head, London.
11. Heath C, Luff P (1991) Disembodied conduct: communication through video in a multi-media environment. In: Proceedings of CHI 1991, pp 99-103.
12. Hoffman L, Krämer NC (2011) How should an artificial entity be embodied? Comparing the effects of a physically present robot and its virtual representation. In: Proceedings of HRI workshop on social robotic telepresence (2011).
13. Hornecker E (2005) A design theme for tangible interaction: embodied facilitation. In: Proceedings of ECSCW 2005, pp 23-43.
14. Hüttenrauch H (2006) From hci to hri: designing interaction for a service robot. PhD thesis, KTH Computer Science and Communication.
15. Hüttenrauch H, Topp E, Severinson-Eklundh K (2009) The art of gate-crashing bringing hri into users' homes. Interact Stud 10(3): 275-298.
16. Jouppi N, Thomas S (2005) Telepresence systems with automatic preservation of user head height, local rotation, and remote translation. In: Proceedings of ICRA 2005, pp 62-68.
17. Kendon A (1990) Conducting interaction: patterns of behavior in focused encounters. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18. Kendon A (2010) Spacing and orientation in co-present interaction. In: Development of multimodal interfaces: active listening and synchrony. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 5967, pp 1-15.
19. Kristoffersson A, Coradeschi S, Severinson-Eklundh K, Loutfi A (2011) Sense of presence in a robotic telepresence domain. In: Proceedings of UAHCI 2011, vol II, pp 479-487.
20. Kuzuoka H, Suzuki Y, Yamashita J, Yamazaki K (2010) Reconfiguring spatial formation arrangement by robot body orientation. In: Proceedings of HRI 2010, pp 285-292.
21. Lee MK, Takayama L (2011) "Now, i have a body": uses and social norms for mobile remote presence in the workplace. In: Proceedings of CHI 2011, pp 33-42.
22. Lombard M, Ditton T (2004) A literature-based presence measurement instrument the temple presence inventory (tpi) (beta). Tech. rep., M. I. N. D. Labs, Temple University, Pennsylvania, USA. http://matthewlombard. com/research/P2scales_11-04. doc. Accessed 6 November 2011.
23. Marshall P, Rogers Y, Pantidi N (2011) Using f-formations to analyse spatial patterns of interaction in physical environments. In: Proceedings of CSCW 2011, pp 445-454.
24. Meisner R, von Lehn D, Heath C, Burch A, Gammon B, Reisman M (2007) Exhibiting performance: co-participation in science centres and museums. Int J Sci Educ 29: 1531-1555.
25. Michaud F, Boissy P, Labonté D, Corriveau H, Grant A, Lauria M, Cloutier R, Roux MA, Iannuzzi D, Royer M-P (2007) Telepresence robot for home care assistance. In: Proceedings of AAAI spring symposium on multidisciplinary collaboration for socially assistive robotics 2007.
26. QB: http://anybots. com. Accessed 6 November 2011.
27. Saffiotti A, Broxvall M (2005) PEIS ecologies: ambient intelligence meets autonomous robotics. In: Proc of the int conf on smart objects and ambient intelligence (sOc-EUSAI), Grenoble, France, pp 275-280.
28. Texai: http://www. willowgarage. com/pages/texai/overview.
29. Tsui KM, Desai M, Yanco HA, Uhlik C (2011) Exploring use cases for telepresence robots. In: HRI'11, pp 11-18.
30. VGo: http://www. vgocom. com/. Accessed 6 November 2011.
31. Yamaoka F, Kanda T, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2010) A model of proximity control for information-presenting robots. IEEE Trans Robot 26(1): 187-194.