Leila Takayama
Victoria Groom
ABSTRACT
As computational agents become more sophisticated, it will frequently be necessary for the agents to disagree with users. In these cases, it might be useful for the agent to use politeness strategies that defuse the person's frustrations and preserve the human-computer relationship. One such strategy is distancing, which we implemented by spatially distancing an agent's voice from its body. In a 2 (agent disagreement: none vs. some) x 2 (agent voice location: on robotic body vs. in control box) between-participants experiment, we studied the effects of agent disagreement and agent voice location in a collaborative human-agent desert survival task (N=40). People changed their answers more often when agents disagreed with them and felt more similar to agents that always agreed with them, even when substantive content was identical. Strikingly, people felt more positively toward the disagreeing agent whose voice came from a separate control box rather than from its body; for agreement, the body-attached voice was preferred.
- Black, A. W. and Lenzo, K. A. Building synthetic voices. Language Technologies Institute, Carnegie Mellon University and Cepstral LLC. http://festvox.org/bsv/Google Scholar
- Breazeal, C., Gray, J., Hoffman, G. and Berlin, M. Social robots: Beyond tools to partners. Proc. ROMAN 2004, IEEE (2004), 551--556.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Breazeal, C., Kidd, C.D., Thomaz, A.L., Hoffman, G. and Berlin, M. Effects of nonverbal communication on efficiency and robustness in human-robot teamwork. IROS 2005, IEEE (2005).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1978.Google Scholar
- Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I. and Dautenhahn, K. A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42 (2003), 143--166.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Friedman, B., Kahn, R.H. and Hagman, J. Hardware Companions? What Online AIBO Discussion Forums Reveal about the Human-Robotic Relationship. Proc. CHI 2003, ACM Press (2003), 273--280. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gemperle, F., DiSalvo, C., Forlizzi, J. and Yonkers, W. The hug: A new form for communication. Proc. DUX 2003, ACM Press (2003), 1--4. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Geertz, C. The interpretation of cultures. Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
- Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books, New York, NY, USA, 1959.Google Scholar
- Groom, V. and Nass, C. Can robots Be teammates?: Benchmarks and predictors of failure in human-robot teams. Interaction Studies (2008), 8(3), 483--500.Google Scholar
- Guerin, B. Mere presence effects in humans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 22 (1986), 38--77.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Horwitz, S. K. The compositional impact of team diversity on performance. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 2 (2005), 219--245.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Klemmer, S.R., Hartmann, B. and Takayama, L. How bodies matter: Five themes for interaction design. Proc. DIS 2006, ACM Press (2006). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kubrick, S. 2001: A Space Odyssey. MGM (1968).Google Scholar
- Kulyukin, V.A. On natural language dialog with assistive robots. HRI 2006, ACM Press (2006), 164--171. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lafferty, J.C. and Eady, P.M. The desert survival problem. Experimental Learning Methods, Plymouth, MI, 1974.Google Scholar
- Lee, K.M. Presence, explicated. Communication Theory 14 (2004), 27--50.Google Scholar
- Lee, K.M., Jung, Y., Kim, J. and Kim, S.R. Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents? IJHCS 64 (2006), 962--973. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maglio, P., Matlock, T., Gould, S.J., Koons, D. and Campbell, C.S. On understanding discourse in human-computer interaction. Proc. Cog Sci 2002, LEA (2002), 602--607.Google Scholar
- Mutlu, B., Oman, S., Forlizzi, J., Hodgins, J. and Kiesler, S. Perceptions of ASIMO. Proc. HRI 2006, ACM Press (2006), 351--352. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nass, C. and Brave, S.B. Wired For Speech. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 2005.Google Scholar
- Nass, C. and Steuer, J. Voices, boxes, and sources of messages. Human Communication Research 19, 4 (1993), 504--527.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nass, C., Takayama, L. and Brave, S.B. Social Consistency. In Zhang, P. and Galletta, D. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations, M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
- Nielsen, J. Coordinating User Interfaces for Consistency. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patel, K., Bailenson, J.N., Hack-Jung, S., Diankov, R. and Bajcsy, R. The effects of fully immersive virtual reality on the learning of physical tasks. Proc. Presence 2006, ISPR (2006).Google Scholar
- Powers, A. and Kiesler, S. The advisor robot: Tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes. Proc. HRI 2006, ACM Press (2006), 218--225. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Powers, A., Kiesler, S., Fussell, S.R. and Torrey, C. Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. Proc. HRI 2007, ACM/IEEE (2007), 145--152.26 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reeves, B. and Nass, C. The Media Equation. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, CA, USA, 1996.Google Scholar
- Steinfeld, A.M., Fong, T., Kaber, D., Lewis, M., Scholtz, J., Schultz, A. and Goodrich, M. Common metrics for human-robot interaction. Proc. HRI 2006, ACM Press (2006), 33--40. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sundar, S. S. and Nass, C. Source orientation in human-computer interaction. Communication Research 27, 6 (2000), 683--703.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Takayama, L. Throwing voices: Investigating the psychological effects of the spatial location of projected voices. Dissertation (2008).Google Scholar
- Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S.N. and Koay, K.L. Robot etiquette. Proc. HRI 2007, ACM Press (2007), 317--324. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wang, E., Lignos, C., Vatsal, A. and Scassellati, B. Effects of head movement on perceptions of humanoid robot behavior. Proc. HRI 2006, ACM Press (2006), 180--185. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- I'm sorry, Dave: i'm afraid i won't do that: social aspects of human-agent conflict
Recommendations
Not Some Random Agent: Multi-person Interaction with a Personalizing Service Robot
HRI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot InteractionService robots often perform their main functions in public settings, interacting with more than one person at a time. How these robots should handle the affairs of individual users while also behaving appropriately when others are present is an open ...
Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people's loneliness in human-robot interaction
Two experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of physical embodiment in human-agent interaction. Experiment 1 (N=32) shows positive effects of physical embodiment on the feeling of an agent's social presence, the evaluation of the agent, the ...
I'm Sorry, Dave, I'm Afraid I Can't Do That: Chatbot Perception and Expectations
HAI '17: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent InteractionArtificial intelligence continues to grow in popularity on mobile platforms, increasing exposure to chatbot apps. Chatbot technology has evolved over time, yet the purpose and added value that chatbots offer has not been clearly defined. In order to ...
Comments