skip to main content
10.1145/2470654.2466253acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

In-body experiences: embodiment, control, and trust in robot-mediated communication

Authors Info & Claims
Published:27 April 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Communication technologies are becoming increasingly diverse in form and functionality, making it important to identify which aspects of these technologies actually improve geographically distributed communication. Our study examines two potentially important aspects of communication technologies which appear in robot-mediated communication - physical embodiment and control of this embodiment. We studied the impact of physical embodiment and control upon interpersonal trust in a controlled laboratory experiment using three different videoconferencing settings: (1) a handheld tablet controlled by a local user, (2) an embodied system controlled by a local user, and (3) an embodied system controlled by a remote user (n = 29 dyads). We found that physical embodiment and control by the local user increased the amount of trust built between partners. These results suggest that both physical embodiment and control of the system influence interpersonal trust in mediated communication and have implications for future system designs.

References

  1. Anybots, Inc. Qb, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). https://www.anybots.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Biocca, F., Harms, C., and Gregg, J. The networked minds measure of social presence: pilot test of the factor structure and concurrent validity. Media Interface and Network Design Lab (2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Bos, N., Olson, J., Gergle, D., Olson, G., and Wright, Z. Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development. In Proceedings of the 2002 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2002), 135--140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Boyle, E. A., Anderson, A. H., and Newlands, A. The effects of visibility on dialogue and performance in a cooperative problem solving task. Language and Speech 37, 1 (January/March 1994), 1--20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Brush, A. B., Meyers, B. R., Scott, J., and Venolia, G. Exploring awareness needs and information display preferences between coworkers. In Proceedings of the 2009 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2009), 2091--2094. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chen, M. Leveraging the asymmetric sensitivity of eye contact for videoconference. In Proceedings of the 2002 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2002), 49--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Clayes, E. L., and Anderson, A. H. Real faces and robot faces: The effects of representation on computer-mediated communication. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65, 6 (2007), 480--496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Dautenhahn, K. Getting to know each other - artificial social intelligence for autonomous robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 16, 2-4 (1995), 333--356. Moving the Frontiers between Robotics and Biology.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Desai, M., Tsui, K., Yanco, H., and Uhlik, C. Essential features of telepresence robots. In Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA), 2011 IEEE Conference on (april 2011), 15 --20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Double Robotics. Double, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). http://www.doublerobotics.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Fels, D. I., Waalen, J. K., Zhai, S., and Weiss, P. Telepresence under exceptional circumstances: Enriching the connection to school for sick children. In Proc. Interact 2001 (2001), 617--624.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M., and Nunamaker, Jay F. J. Electronic brainstorming and group size. The Academy of Management Journal 35, 2 (1992), pp. 350--369.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Giraff Technologies AB. Giraff, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). http://www.giraff.org/om-giraff/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Gorawara-Bhat, R., Cook, M. A., and Sachs, G. A. Nonverbal communication in doctor-elderly patient transactions: Development of a tool. Patient Education and Counseling 66, 2 (2007), 223--234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Heath, C., and Luff, P. Disembodied conduct: communication through video in a multi-media office environment. In Proceedings of the 1991 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (1991), 99--103. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Hiltz, S. R., Johnson, K., and Turoff, M. Experiments in group decision making communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research 13, 2 (1986), 225--252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Ishiguro, H., and Trivedi, M. Integrating a perceptual information infrastructure with robotic avatars: a framework for tele-existence. In Proceedings of the 1999 international conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, vol. 2, IEEE (1999), 1032--1038.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Johnson-George, C., and Swap, W. C. Measurement of specific interpersonal trust: Construction and validation of a scale to assess trust in a specific other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43, 6 (1982), 1306--1317.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Kenny, D., Kashy, D., and Cook, W. Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., and McGuire, T. W. Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist 39, 10 (1984), 1123--1134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Kiesler, S., and Sproull, L. Group decision making and communication technology. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 52, 1 (1992), 96--123.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Lee, M. K., and Takayama, L. "Now, I have a body": uses and social norms for mobile remote presence in the workplace. In Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2011), 33--42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Michaud, F., Boissy, P., Corriveau, H., Grant, A., Lauria, M., Labonte, D., Cloutier, R., Roux, M., Royer, M., and Iannuzzi, D. Telepresence robot for home care assistance. In Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Multidisciplinary Collaboration for Socially Assistive Robotics (2007), 50--56.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Morita, T., Mase, K., Hirano, Y., and Kajita, S. Reciprocal attentive communication in remote meeting with a humanoid robot. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Multimodal interfaces, ACM Press (2007), 228--235. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Nguyen, D. T., and Canny, J. Multiview: improving trust in group video conferencing through spatial faithfulness. In Proceedings of the 2007 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2007), 1465--1474. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Nguyen, D. T., and Canny, J. More than face-to-face: empathy effects of video framing. In Proceedings of the 2009 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2009), 423--432. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Olson, G. M., and Olson, J. S. Distance matters. Human-Computer Interaction 15, 2 (Sept. 2000), 139--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. O'Malley, C., Langton, S., Anderson, A., Doherty-Sneddon, G., and Bruce, V. Comparison of face-to-face and video-mediated interaction. Interacting with Computers 8, 2 (1996), 177--192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Paulos, E., and Canny, J. Prop: personal roving presence. In Proceedings of the 1998 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (1998), 296--303. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Porta, R. L., de Silane, F. L., Shleifer, A., and Vishny, R. W. Trust in large organizations. Working Paper 5864, National Bureau of Economic Research, December 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Rae, I., Takayama, L., and Mutlu, B. One of the gang: supporting in-group behavior for embodied mediated communication. In Proceedings of the 2012 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2012), 3091--3100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. RoboDynamics. Luna, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). http://robodynamics.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., and Camerer, C. Not so different after all : A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23, 3 (1998), 393--404.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Sakamoto, D., Kanda, T., Ono, T., Ishiguro, H., and Hagita, N. Android as a telecommunication medium with a human-like presence. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Human-robot interaction, ACM Press (2007), 193--200. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., and Davis, J. H. An integrative model of organizational trust: Past, present, and future. The Academy of Management Review 32, 2 (2007), 344--354.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Sellen, A. J. Remote conversations: the effects of mediating talk with technology. Human-Computer Interaction 10, 4 (Dec. 1995), 401--444. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Straus, S. G., and McGrath, J. E. Does the medium matter? the interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology 79, 1 (1994), 87--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Suitable Technologies. Texai, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). http://www.willowgarage.com/pages/texai/overview.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Tang, A., Pahud, M., Inkpen, K., Benko, H., Tang, J. C., and Buxton, B. Three's company: understanding communication channels in three-way distributed collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, ACM Press (2010), 271--280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Tsui, K., and Yanco, H. Assistive, rehabilitation, and surgical robots from the perspective of medical and healthcare professionals. In AAAI 2007 Workshop on Human Implications of Human-Robot Interaction, Technical Report WS-07-07 Papers from the AAAI 2007 Workshop on Human Implications of HRI (2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Tsui, K. M., Desai, M., Yanco, H. A., and Uhlik, C. Exploring use cases for telepresence robots. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction, ACM Press (2011), 11--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Venolia, G., Tang, J., Cervantes, R., Bly, S., Robertson, G., Lee, B., and Inkpen, K. Embodied social proxy: mediating interpersonal connection in hub-and-satellite teams. In Proceedings of the 2010 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM Press (2010), 1049--1058. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. VGo Communications, Inc. Vgo, 2012 (accessed September 8, 2012). http://www.vgocom.com/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Weeks, G. D., and Chapanis, A. Cooperative versus conflictive problem solving in three telecommunication modes. Perceptual and motor skills 42, 3 (06/01; 2012/09 1976), 879--917.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Witmer, B. G., Jerome, C. J., and Singer, M. J. The factor structure of the presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 14, 3 (2005), 298--312. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. In-body experiences: embodiment, control, and trust in robot-mediated communication

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '13: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2013
        3550 pages
        ISBN:9781450318990
        DOI:10.1145/2470654

        Copyright © 2013 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 27 April 2013

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '13 Paper Acceptance Rate392of1,963submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        Upcoming Conference

        CHI '24
        CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        May 11 - 16, 2024
        Honolulu , HI , USA

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader