Raquel Oliveira
Filipa Correia
ABSTRACT
This study investigated non-verbal behavior and socioemotional interactions in small-groups of humans and robots. Sixty-participants were involved in a group setting in which they were required to play a card game with another human and two robots (playing as partners or as opponents). The two robots displayed different goal orientations: a competitive robot (named Emys-) and a relationship-driven cooperative robot (named Glin+). Video recordings of the interactions were analyzed in three game play sessions. Eye gaze and socioemotional support behaviors were coded based on Bales» Interaction Process Analysis. Results indicated that gaze behavior towards partners was more frequently displayed to the relationship-driven robot than to the competitive robot and the human partners. In contrast, gaze towards opponents occurred more often towards the competitive robot than to the relationship-driven robot and the human opponents. Socioemotional support occurred more frequently towards partners than opponents, and was also displayed more often towards humans than towards robots. Moreover, in the sessions where the robots were opponents, participants provided more support to the competitive robot. This investigation in small groups of humans and robots provided evidence of different interaction patterns towards robots displaying distinct orientation goals, which can be useful in guiding the successful design of social robots.
- Patrıcia Alves-Oliveira, Pedro Sequeira, ED Tullio, Sofia Petisca, and bibinfop ersonCarla Guerra . 2015. It's amazing we are all feeling it!? Emotional Climate as a Group-Level Emotional Expression in HRI. In Art. Intel. and Human-Robot Interaction, AAAI Fall Symposium Series.Google Scholar
- Patr'ıcia Arriaga, Francisco Esteves, and Allard R Feddes . 2014. Looking at the (mis) fortunes of others while listening to music. Psychology of Music, Vol. 42, 2 (2014), 251--268.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Patricia Arriaga, Ana Paiva, Sofia Petisca, Raquel Oliveira, Patrícia Alves-Oliveira, and Filipa Correia . 2017. The Game Sueca. (Dec . 2017). osf.io/wshcyGoogle Scholar
- Anita Atwal and Kay Caldwell . 2005. Do all health and social care professionals interact equally: a study of interactions in multidisciplinary teams in the United Kingdom. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences Vol. 19, 3 (2005), 268--273.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jeremy N Bailenson, Andrew C Beall, Jack Loomis, Jim Blascovich, and Matthew Turk . 2005. Transformed social interaction, augmented gaze, and social influence in immersive virtual environments. Human communication research Vol. 31, 4 (2005), 511--537.Google Scholar
- Roger Bakeman and Vicencc Quera . 2011. Sequential analysis and observational methods for the behavioral sciences. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Robert F Bales . 1950. Interaction process analysis; a method for the study of small groups. (1950).Google Scholar
- Robert F Bales . 1999. Social Interaction Systems: Theory and Measurement. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
- Roy F Baumeister and Mark R Leary . 1995. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin Vol. 117, 3 (1995), 497.Google Scholar
- Steven A Beebe and John T Masterson . 2014. Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices. Pearson Higher Ed.Google Scholar
- Lisa F Berkman . 1984. Assessing the physical health effects of social networks and social support. Annual review of public health Vol. 5, 1 (1984), 413--432.Google Scholar
- Cynthia Breazeal . 2004. Function meets style: insights from emotion theory applied to HRI. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), Vol. 34, 2 (2004), 187--194. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cynthia Breazeal, Cory D Kidd, Andrea Lockerd Thomaz, Guy Hoffman, and Matt Berlin . 2005. Effects of nonverbal communication on efficiency and robustness in human-robot teamwork 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 708--713.Google Scholar
- Frank Broz, Hagen Lehmann, Chrystopher L Nehaniv, and Kerstin Dautenhahn . 2012. Mutual gaze, personality, and familiarity: Dual eye-tracking during conversation RO-MAN, 2012 IEEE. IEEE, 858--864.Google Scholar
- Colleen M Carpinella, Alisa B Wyman, Michael A Perez, and Steven J Stroessner . 2017. The Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS): Development and Validation Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 254--262. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wan-Ling Chang, Jeremy P White, Joohyun Park, Anna Holm, and Selma vSabanović . 2012. The effect of group size on people's attitudes and cooperative behaviors toward robots in interactive gameplay. In 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, 845--850.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jill MacLaren Chorney, C Meghan McMurtry, Christine T Chambers, and Roger Bakeman . 2014. Developing and modifying behavioral coding schemes in pediatric psychology: a practical guide. Journal of pediatric psychology Vol. 40, 1 (2014), 154--164.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Silvia Coradeschi and Alessandro Saffiotti . 2006. Symbiotic robotic systems: Humans, robots, and smart environments. IEEE Intelligent Systems Vol. 21, 3 (2006), 82--84. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Filipa Correia, Patr'ıcia Alves-Oliveira, Nuno Maia, Tiago Ribeiro, Sofia Petisca, Francisco S Melo, and Ana Paiva . 2016. Just follow the suit! trust in human-robot interactions during card game playing Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 507--512.Google Scholar
- Filipa Correia, Patr'ıcia Alves-Oliveira, Tiago Ribeiro, Francisco S Melo, and Ana Paiva . 2017 a. A social robot as a card game player. In 13th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment.Google Scholar
- Filipa Correia, Sofia Petisca, Patrıcia Alves-Oliveira, Tiago Ribeiro, Francisco S Melo, and Ana Paiva . 2017 b. Groups of humans and robots: Understanding membership preferences and team formation Robotics: Science and Systems, RSS'17.Google Scholar
- Barbara G Deutsch . 1974. The structure of task oriented dialogs. Technical Report. SRI International Menlo Park United States.Google Scholar
- Morton Deutsch . 1977. The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Joseph L Fleiss . 1981. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
- Thomas D Fletcher, Debra A Major, and Donald D Davis . 2008. The interactive relationship of competitive climate and trait competitiveness with workplace attitudes, stress, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior Vol. 29, 7 (2008), 899--922.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Margaret Foddy . 1978. Patterns of gaze in cooperative and competitive negotiation. Human relations, Vol. 31, 11 (1978), 925--938.Google Scholar
- Marlena R Fraune, Satoru Kawakami, Selma Sabanovic, P Ravindra S De Silva, and Michio Okada . 2015 a. Three's company, or a crowd?: The effects of robot number and behavior on HRI in Japan and the USA.. In Robotics: Science and Systems.Google Scholar
- Marlena R Fraune, Steven Sherrin, Selma Sabanović, and Eliot R Smith . 2015 b. Rabble of robots effects: Number and type of robots modulates attitudes, emotions, and stereotypes Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 109--116. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rick Fry and Gene F Smith . 1975. The effects of feedback and eye contact on performance of a digit-coding task. The Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 96, 1 (1975), 145--146.Google ScholarCross Ref
- RN Gameson . 1992. An investigation into the interaction between potential building clients and construction professionals. Ph.D. Dissertation. bibinfoschoolUniversity of Reading.Google Scholar
- Victoria Groom and Clifford Nass . 2007. Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human--robot teams. Interaction Studies, Vol. 8, 3 (2007), 483--500.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Judith A Hall, Erik J Coats, and Lavonia Smith LeBeau . 2005. Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: a meta-analysis. (2005).Google Scholar
- Nick Haslam . 2006. Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and social psychology review Vol. 10, 3 (2006), 252--264.Google Scholar
- Miles Hewstone, Mark Rubin, and Hazel Willis . 2002. Intergroup bias. Annual review of psychology Vol. 53, 1 (2002), 575--604.Google Scholar
- Pamela J Hinds, Teresa L Roberts, and Hank Jones . 2004. Whose job is it anyway? A study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task. Human-Computer Interaction Vol. 19, 1 (2004), 151--181. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ashatu Hussein . 2015. The use of triangulation in social sciences research: Can qualitative and quantitative methods be combined? Journal of Comparative Social Work Vol. 4, 1 (2015).Google Scholar
- Malte F Jung, Jin Joo Lee, Nick DePalma, Sigurdur O Adalgeirsson, Pamela J Hinds, and Cynthia Breazeal . 2013. Engaging robots: easing complex human-robot teamwork using backchanneling Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work. ACM, 1555--1566. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Simone Kauffeld and Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock . 2012. Meetings matter: Effects of team meetings on team and organizational success. Small Group Research, Vol. 43, 2 (2012), 130--158.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David A Kenny and Deborah A Kashy . 2011. Dyadic data analysis using multilevel modeling. Handbook of advanced multilevel analysis (2011), 335--370.Google Scholar
- David A Kenny, Lucia Mannetti, Antonio Pierro, Stefano Livi, and Deborah A Kashy . 2002. The statistical analysis of data from small groups. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 83, 1 (2002), 126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joann Keyton and Stephenson J Beck . 2009. The influential role of relational messages in group interaction. Group dynamics: Theory, research, and practice, Vol. 13, 1 (2009), 14.Google Scholar
- Hermano Igo Krebs, Jerome Joseph Palazzolo, Laura Dipietro, Mark Ferraro, Jennifer Krol, Keren Rannekleiv, Bruce T Volpe, and Neville Hogan . 2003. Rehabilitation robotics: Performance-based progressive robot-assisted therapy. Autonomous robots, Vol. 15, 1 (2003), 7--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dieta Kuchenbrandt, Friederike Eyssel, Simon Bobinger, and Maria Neufeld . 2011. Minimal group-maximal effect? evaluation and anthropomorphization of the humanoid robot NAO. Social robotics (2011), 104--113. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Iolanda Leite, Marissa McCoy, Monika Lohani, Daniel Ullman, Nicole Salomons, Charlene Stokes, Susan Rivers, and Brian Scassellati . 2015. Emotional storytelling in the classroom: Individual versus group interaction between children and robots. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 75--82. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sonne Lemke and Rudolf H Moos . 1987. Measuring the social climate of congregate residences for older people: Sheltered Care Environment Scale. Psychology and Aging, Vol. 2, 1 (1987), 20.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ruth McCorkle . 1974. Effects of touch on seriously ill patients. Nursing Research, Vol. 23, 2 (1974), 125--131.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daihwan Min, Yun H Chung, and Wan C Yoon . 2004. Comparative analysis of communication at main control rooms of nuclear power plants. (2004).Google Scholar
- Omar Mubin, Catherine J Stevens, Suleman Shahid, Abdullah Al Mahmud, and Jian-Jie Dong . 2013. A review of the applicability of robots in education. Journal of Technology in Education and Learning Vol. 1 (2013), 209--0015.Google Scholar
- Bilge Mutlu and Jodi Forlizzi . 2008. Robots in organizations: the role of workflow, social, and environmental factors in human-robot interaction. In Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 287--294. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bilge Mutlu, Jodi Forlizzi, and Jessica Hodgins . 2006. A storytelling robot: Modeling and evaluation of human-like gaze behavior Humanoid robots, 2006 6th IEEE-RAS international conference on. IEEE, 518--523.Google Scholar
- Bilge Mutlu, Toshiyuki Shiwa, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita . 2009. Footing in human-robot conversations: how robots might shape participant roles using gaze cues Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction. ACM, 61--68. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ahsan Nawroj, Mariya Toneva, Henny Admoni, and Brian Scassellati . 2014. An exploration of social grouping in robots: Effects of behavioral mimicry, appearance, and eye gaze. In Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society, Vol. Vol. 36.Google Scholar
- Lucas PJJ Noldus, Rudie JH Trienes, André HM Hendriksen, Han Jansen, and Roland G Jansen . 2000. The Observer Video-Pro: New software for the collection, management, and presentation of time-structured data from videotapes and digital media files. Behavior Research methods Vol. 32, 1 (2000), 197--206.Google Scholar
- Oliveira, Arriaga, Correia, Alves-Oliveira, Petisca, and Paiva . 2017. Robot Utterances and Gaze. (Nov . 2017). osf.io/q9gu5Google Scholar
- Gary M Olson, Judith S Olson, Mark R Carter, and Marianne Storrosten . 1992. Small group design meetings: An analysis of collaboration. Human-Computer Interaction Vol. 7, 4 (1992), 347--374. Google ScholarDigital Library
- John F O'Rourke . 1963. Field and laboratory: The decision-making behavior of family groups in two experimental conditions. Sociometry (1963), 422--435.Google Scholar
- Jorge Pe na and Jeffrey T Hancock . 2006. An analysis of socioemotional and task communication in online multiplayer video games. Communication research Vol. 33, 1 (2006), 92--109.Google Scholar
- Rosalind W Picard . 2004. What does it mean for a computer to 'have' emotions? Chapter to appear in: Emotions in Humans and Artifacts ed. by R. Trappl, P. Petta and S. Payr. (2004).Google Scholar
- Mary E Procidano . 1992. The nature of perceived social support: Findings of meta-analytic studies. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1--26.Google Scholar
- Brad E Sheese and William G Graziano . 2005. Deciding to defect: The effects of video-game violence on cooperative behavior. Psychological science Vol. 16, 5 (2005), 354--357.Google Scholar
- Philip E Slater . 1955. Role differentiation in small groups. American Sociological Review Vol. 20, 3 (1955), 300--310.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aaron Steinfeld, Terrence Fong, David Kaber, Michael Lewis, Jean Scholtz, Alan Schultz, and Michael Goodrich . 2006. Common metrics for human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction. ACM, 33--40. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jonathan HW Tan and Daniel John Zizzo . 2008. Groups, cooperation and conflict in games. The Journal of Socio-Economics Vol. 37, 1 (2008), 1--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jason Tipples . 2006. Fear and fearfulness potentiate automatic orienting to eye gaze. Cognition & Emotion, Vol. 20, 2 (2006), 309--320.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jered Vroon, Michiel Joosse, Manja Lohse, Jan Kolkmeier, Jaebok Kim, Khiet Truong, Gwenn Englebienne, Dirk Heylen, and Vanessa Evers . 2015. Dynamics of social positioning patterns in group-robot interactions Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2015 24th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 394--399.Google Scholar
- Jered Vroon, Sanne van Waveren, Cristina Zaga, and Vanessa Evers . 2017. Groups in Conflict at the Airport: How People Think a Robot Should Act CSCW'17 Workshop on Robots in Groups and Teams. IEEE, Online published.Google Scholar
- Marynel Vásquez, Elizabeth Carter, Braden McDorman, Jodi Forlizzi, Aaron Steinfeld, and Scott Hudson . 2017. Towards Robot Autonomy in Groups Conversations: Understanding the effects of body orientation and Gaze. In International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI. ACM Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joseph B Walther . 1992. Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication research Vol. 19, 1 (1992), 52--90.Google Scholar
- Yuichiro Yoshikawa, Kazuhiko Shinozawa, Hiroshi Ishiguro, Norihiro Hagita, and Takanori Miyamoto . 2006. Responsive Robot Gaze to Interaction Partner.. In Robotics: Science and systems.Google Scholar
- Patrick H Zimmerman, J Elizabeth Bolhuis, Albert Willemsen, Erik S Meyer, and Lucas PJJ Noldus . 2009. The Observer XT: A tool for the integration and synchronization of multimodal signals. Behavior research methods Vol. 41, 3 (2009), 731--735.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Friends or Foes?: Socioemotional Support and Gaze Behaviors in Mixed Groups of Humans and Robots
Recommendations
Gaze in HRI: from modeling to communication
HRI '12: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot InteractionThe purpose of this half-day workshop is to explore the role of social gaze in human-robot interaction, both how to measure social gaze behavior by humans and how to implement it in robots that interact with them. Gaze directed at an interaction partner ...
Have you ever lied?: the impacts of gaze avoidance on people's perception of a robot
HRI '13: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interactionIn human-human interaction, gaze avoidance is usually interpreted as having intention to escape from an embarrassing situation. This study explores whether gaze avoidance by a robot can be delivered as an intention, and whether this intention can make a ...
Human-robot proxemics: physical and psychological distancing in human-robot interaction
HRI '11: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interactionTo seamlessly integrate into the human physical and social environment, robots must display appropriate proxemic behavior - that is, follow societal norms in establishing their physical and psychological distancing with people. Social-scientific ...
Comments