Empirical evaluation of the uncanny valley hypothesis fails to confirm the predicted effect of motion

Cognition

Volumn 130, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 271-277

  Piwek, Lukasz ^a   McKay, Lawrie S ^b   Pollick, Frank E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR NEUROSCIENCE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Action perception; Affect recognition; Animation; Biological motion; Uncanny valley

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHARACTER ANIMATION; COMPUTER LANGUAGE; ELBOW; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYPOTHESIS; MOTION; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; ROBOTICS; SHOULDER; UNCANNY VALLEY HYPOTHESIS; VIRTUAL REALITY; AFFECT; AUDIOVISUAL EQUIPMENT; COMPUTER INTERFACE; FEMALE; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AFFECT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; MOTION PICTURES AS TOPIC; ROBOTICS; SOCIAL PERCEPTION; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84891052751     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.11.001     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Bailenson J.N., Yee N. Digital chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science 2005, 16:814-819.
2. Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2007). Is the uncanny valley an uncanny cliff?. In 16th IEEE international conference on robot and human interactive communication (pp 368-373). Jeju, Korea.
3. Bernstein N.A. The co-ordination and regulation of movements 1967, Pergamon Press, Oxford.
4. Boker S.M., Cohn J.F., Theobald B.J., Matthews I., Spies J.R., Brick T.R. Something in the way we move: Motion dynamics, not perceived sex, influence head movements in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2011, 37:874-891.
5. Brainard D.H. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:433-436.
6. Chaminade T., Hodgins J., Kawato M. Anthropomorphism influences perception of computer-animated characters' actions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 2007, 2:206-216.
7. Fabri M., Moore D., Hobbs D. Mediating the expression of emotion in educational collaborative virtual environments: an experimental study. Virtual Reality 2004, 7:66-81.
8. Flash T., Hogan N. The coordination of arm movements: An experimentally confirmed mathematical model. Journal of Neuroscience 1985, 5:1688-1703.
9. Fong T. A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 2003, 42:143-166.
10. Geller T. Overcoming the uncanny valley. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 2008, 28:11-17.
11. Gray K., Wegner D.M. Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley. Cognition 2012, 125:125-130.
12. Hanson, D. (2006). Exploring the aesthetic range for humanoid robots. In Proceedings of the ICCS/CogSci-2006 long symposium: Toward social mechanisms of android science (pp. 39-42).
13. Ho C.-C., MacDorman K.F. Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices. Computers in Human Behavior 2010, 26:1508-1518.
14. Hodgins J.K., O'Brien J.-F., Tumblin J. Perception of human motion with different geometric models. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 1998, 4:307-316.
15. Ishiguro H. Scientific issues concerning androids. The International Journal of Robotics Research 2007, 26:105-117.
16. Jentsch E. On the psychology of the uncanny. Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities 1906, 2:7-16.
17. Kuratate T., Ayers K., Kim J., Riley M., Burnham D. Are virtual humans uncanny?: Varying speech, appearance and motion to better understand the acceptability of synthetic humans. AVSP 2009, 65-69.
18. Ma Y., Paterson H.M., Pollick F.E. A motion capture library for the study of identity, gender, and emotion perception from biological motion. Behavior Research Methods 2006, 38:134-141.
19. MacDorman K.F., Green R.D., Ho C.-C., Koch C.T. Too real for comfort? Uncanny responses to computer generated faces. Computers in Human Behavior 2009, 25:695-710.
20. MacDorman K., Ishiguro H. The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research. Interaction Studies 2006, 7:297-337.
21. McDonnell R., Breidt M., Bülthoff H.H. Render me real? Investigating the effect of render style on the perception of animated virtual humans. ACM Transactions on Graphics 2012, 31:1-11.
22. Mitchell W.J., Szerszen K.A., Lu A.S., Schermerhorn P.W., Scheutz M., MacDorman K.F. A mismatch in the human realism of face and voice produces an uncanny valley. i-Perception 2011, 2(1):10-12.
23. Moore R.K. A Bayesian explanation of the 'Uncanny Valley' effect and related psychological phenomena. Nature Scientific Reports 2012, 2:864.
24. Mori, M. (2012). The uncanny valley. In K. F. MacDorman, & N. Kageki (Trans.), IEEE robotics and automation, 19(2), 98-100 (Original work published in 1970).
25. Pelli D. The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:437-442.
26. Pollick F.E. In search of the uncanny valley. User centric media 2010, 69-78. Springer, New York. P. Daras, O. Mayora (Eds.).
27. Pollick F.E., Hale J.G., Tzoneva-Hadjigeorgieva M. Perception of humanoid movement. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics 2005, 2:277-300.
28. Rosenbaum D.A. Human motor control 2009, Elsevier.
29. Saygin A.P., Chaminade T., Ishiguro H., Driver J., Frith C. The thing that should not be: predictive coding and the uncanny valley in perceiving human and humanoid robot actions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 2012, 6:1-10.
30. Seyama J., Nagayama R.S. The uncanny valley: Effect of realism on the impression of artificial human faces. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 2007, 16:337-351.
31. Steckenfinger S.A., Ghazanfar A.A. Monkey visual behavior falls into the uncanny valley. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2009, 106:18362-18366.
32. Thompson J.C., Trafton J.G., McKnight P. The perception of humanness from the movements of synthetic agents. Perception 2011, 40:695-705.
33. Tinwell A., Grimshaw M., Nabi D.A., Williams A. Facial expression of emotion and perception of the Uncanny Valley in virtual characters. Computers in Human Behavior 2011, 27:741-749.
34. Tinwell A. Applying psychological plausibility to the Uncanny Valley phenomenon. Oxford handbook of virtuality 2014, 173-186. Oxford University Press, New York. M. Grimshaw (Ed.).
35. Vatakis A., Spence C. Crossmodal binding: Evaluating the "unity assumption" using audiovisual speech stimuli. Perception and Psychophysics 2007, 69:744-756.
36. Von der Pütten A.M., Krämer N.C., Gratch J., Kang S. It doesn't matter what you are!" explaining social effects of agents and avatars. Computers in Human Behavior 2010, 26:1641-1650.
37. Welch R.B., Warren D.H. Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychological Bulletin 1980, 88(3):638-667.
38. Zanbaka, C., Ulinski, A., Goolkasian, P., & Hodges, L. F. (2007). Social responses to virtual humans: Implications for future interface design. In Computer-human interaction: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1561-1570), San Jose, CA.
39. Zemeckis R. The polar express [film] 2004, Warner Bros, Los Angeles.