Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Dynamics in Human-Robot Groups – Possible Consequences of Unequal Adaptation to Group Members Through Machine Learning in Human-Robot Groups

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence in HCI (HCII 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12217))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Social robots designed to live and work with humans will have to recognize, learn from, and adapt to multiple users, since humans live and organize themselves in groups. Social robots must consider the social dynamics that arise when humans interact in groups as well as the social consequences of their own behaviour in these groups. When trying to automatically adapt to its users, a robot might unintentionally favour one human group member. For instance, when in a work setting, a robot’s implemented goal is to maximize team performance, it might decide to distribute more resources to those team members who are identified as high performers in the task, thereby discriminating low performers. Algorithm-based learning and decision-making can result in unequal treatment, intergroup bias and social exclusion of team members with severe negative outcomes for the emotional state of the individual and the social dynamics in the group. In this paper, we advocate for systematically investigating ingroup identification and intergroup bias in human-robot group interactions and their possible negative effects for individuals such as feelings of rejection, social exclusion, and ostracism. We review theories from social psychology on groups and outline future research lines to investigate social dynamics in human-robot mixed teams from the perspectives of psychology and computer science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Abrams, A.M.H., Rosenthal-von der Pütten, A.: I–C–E Framework: Concepts for Group Dynamics Research in Human-robot Interaction (2019). https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jyue6

  2. Abrams, D., Hogg, M.A.: Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 18(4), 317–334 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420180403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Admoni, H., Hayes, B., Feil-Seifer, D., Ullman, D., Scassellati, B.: Are you looking at me? Perception of robot attention is mediated by gaze type and group size. In: Staff, I. (ed.) 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 389–395. IEEE, [Place of publication not identified] (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2013.6483614

  4. Alves-Oliveira, P., et al.: It’s amazing, we are all feeling it! Emotional climate as a group-level emotional expression in HRI. In: 2015 AAAI Fall Symposium Series (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bennewitz, M., Faber, F., Joho, D., Schreiber, M., Behnke, S.: Towards a humanoid museum guide robot that interacts with multiple persons. In: 2005 5th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, pp. 418–423. IEEE Operations Center, Piscataway (2005). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHR.2005.1573603

  6. Brewer, M.B.: Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: when does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In: Ashmore, R.D., Jussim, L., Wilder, D. (eds.) Social Identity, Intergroup Conflict, and Conflict Reduction. Rutgers Series on Self and Social Identity, vol. 3, pp. 17–41. Oxford University Press (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Carron, A.V., Brawley, L.R.: Cohesion. Small Group Res. 31(1), 89–106 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1177/104649640003100105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Claure, H., Chen, Y., Modi, J., Jung, M., Nikolaidis, S.: Reinforcement learning with fairness constraints for resource distribution in human-robot teams. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00313v2

  9. Deligianis, C., Stanton, C.J., McGarty, C., Stevens, C.J.: The impact of intergroup bias on trust and approach behaviour towards a humanoid robot. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 6(3), 4 (2017). https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.6.3.Deligianis

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Effron, D.A., Kakkar, H., Knowles, E.D.: Group cohesion benefits individuals who express prejudice, but harms their group. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 79, 239–251 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.08.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ellemers, N., Haslam, S.A.: Social identity theory. In: van Lange, P., Kruglanski, A., Higgins, E. (eds.) Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology, pp. 379–398. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2012). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Eyssel, F., Kuchenbrandt, D.: Social categorization of social robots: anthropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 51(4), 724–731 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02082.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fraune, M.R., Nishiwaki, Y., Sabanović, S., Smith, E.R., Okada, M.: Threatening flocks and mindful snowflakes. In: HRI. HRI 2017, pp. 205–213. IEEE, Piscataway (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020248

  14. Fraune, M.R., Šabanović, S., Kanda, T.: Human group presence, group characteristics, and group norms affect human-robot interaction in naturalistic settings. Front. Robot. AI 6, 3 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fraune, M.R., Sherrin, S., Sabanović, S., Smith, E.R.: Rabble of robots effects. In: Adams, J.A., Smart, W., Mutlu, B., Takayama, L. (eds.) HRI 2015, pp. 109–116. ACM, New York (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696483

  16. He, K., Gkioxari, G., Dollar, P., Girshick, R.: Mask R-CNN. In: Ikeuchi, K. (ed.) IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 2980–2988. IEEE, Piscataway (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2017.322

  17. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., Willis, H.: Intergroup bias. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 53, 575–604 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Howard, A., Borenstein, J.: The ugly truth about ourselves and our robot creations: the problem of bias and social inequity. Sci. Eng. Ethics 24(5), 1521–1536 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9975-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Iqbal, T., Rack, S., Riek, L.D.: Movement coordination in human-robot teams: a dynamical systems approach. IEEE Trans. Rob. 32(4), 909–919 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2016.2570240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Jetten, J., Spears, R., Manstead, A.S.R.: Intergroup norms and intergroup discrimination: distinctive self-categorization and social identity effects. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71(6), 1222–1233 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.6.1222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Johansson, M., Skantze, G., Gustafson, J.: Comparison of human-human and human-robot turn-taking behaviour in multiparty situated interaction. In: Al Moubayed, S., et al. (eds.) UM3I 2014, pp. 21–26. ACM (2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2666242.2666249

  22. Jung, M., Hinds, P.: Robots in the wild. ACM Trans. Hum.-Robot Interact. 7(1), 1–5 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3208975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jung, M.F., Šabanović, S., Eyssel, F., Fraune, M.: Robots in groups and teams. In: Lee, C.P. (ed.) Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, pp. 401–407. ACM, New York (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3022659

  24. Kuchenbrandt, D., Eyssel, F., Bobinger, S., Neufeld, M.: Minimal group - maximal effect? Evaluation and anthropomorphization of the humanoid robot NAO. In: Mutlu, B., Bartneck, C., Ham, J., Evers, V., Kanda, T. (eds.) ICSR 2011. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7072, pp. 104–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25504-5_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Leite, I., McCoy, M., Ullman, D., Salomons, N., Scassellati, B.: Comparing models of disengagement in individual and group interactions. In: Adams, J.A., Smart, W., Mutlu, B., Takayama, L. (eds.) HRI 2015, pp. 99–105. ACM, New York (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696466

  26. Levine, J.M., Moreland, R.L.: A history of small group research. Kruglanski, A.W., Stroebe, W. (eds.) Handbook of the History of Social Psychology 2012, pp. 383–405 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lickel, B., Hamilton, D.L., Wieczorkowska, G., Lewis, A., Sherman, S.J., Uhles, A.N.: Varieties of groups and the perception of group entitativity. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78(2), 223–246 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Martelaro, N., Jung, M., Hinds, P.: Using robots to moderate team conflict. In: Adams, J.A. (ed.) Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACMIEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Extended Abstracts, p. 271. ACM, New York (2015). https://doi.org/10.1145/2701973.2702094

  29. Osep, A., Mehner, W., Voigtlaender, P., Leibe, B.: Track, then decide: category-agnostic vision-based multi-object tracking. In: Lynch, K., Automation, I.I.C.o.R.a. (eds.) 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 3494–3501. IEEE, Piscataway (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2018.8460975

  30. Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Richter, V., et al.: Are you talking to me? In: Yau, W.Y., Omori, T., Metta, G., Osawa, H., Zhao, S. (eds.) HAI 2016, pp. 43–50. The Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2974804.2974823

  32. Righetti, L., Madhavan, R., Chatila, R.: Unintended consequences of biased robotic and artificial intelligence systems [Ethical, Legal, and Societal Issues]. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 26(3), 11–13 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2019.2926996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosenthal-von der Pütten, A.M., Krämer, N.C., Hoffmann, L., Sobieraj, S., Eimler, S.C.: An experimental study on emotional reactions towards a robot. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 5(1), 17–34 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-012-0173-8

  34. Rutchick, A.M., Hamilton, D.L., Sack, J.D.: Antecedents of entitativity in categorically and dynamically construed groups. Eur. J. Soci. Psychol. 38(6), 905–921 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shen, S., Slovak, P., Jung, M.F.: Stop. I see a conflict happening. In: Kanda, T., Sabanović, S., Hoffman, G., Tapus, A. (eds.) HRI 2018, pp. 69–77. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171248

  36. Simmel, G.: The number of members as determining the sociological form of the group. II. Am. J. Sociol. 8(2), 158–196 (1902)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Straßmann, C., von der Pütten, A.R., Yaghoubzadeh, R., Kaminski, R., Krämer, N.: The effect of an intelligent virtual agent’s nonverbal behavior with regard to dominance and cooperativity. In: Traum, D., Swartout, W., Khooshabeh, P., Kopp, S., Scherer, S., Leuski, A. (eds.) IVA 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10011, pp. 15–28. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47665-0_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Tajfel, H.: Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Inf. (Int. Soc. Sci. Counc. 13(2), 65–93 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Tajfel, H., Billig, M.G., Bundy, R.P., Flament, C.: Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1(2), 149–178 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420010202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tennent, H., Shen, S., Jung, M.: Micbot: a peripheral robotic object to shape conversational dynamics and team performance. In: 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 11–14 March 2019, pp. 133–142. IEEE (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673013

  41. van Veelen, R., Otten, S., Hansen, N.: A personal touch to diversity: self-anchoring increases minority members’ identification in a diverse group. Group Process. Intergroup Relat. 16(6), 671–683 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430212473167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Wang, Q., Zhang, L., Bertinetto, L., Hu, W., Torr, P.H.: Fast online object tracking and segmentation: a unifying approach, pp. 1328–1338 (2019). https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.05050

  43. Williams, K.D.: Ostracism: a temporal need-threat model. In: Zanna, M.P. (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 41, pp. 275–314. Academic Press, London (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00406-1

  44. Zadro, L., Williams, K.D., Richardson, R.: How low can you go? Ostracism by a computer is sufficient to lower self-reported levels of belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40(4), 560–567 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Zaraki, A., Mazzei, D., Giuliani, M., de Rossi, D.: Designing and evaluating a social gaze-control system for a humanoid robot. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 44(2), 157–168 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2303083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Zou, J., Schiebinger, L.: AI can be sexist and racist - it’s time to make it fair. Nature 559(7714), 324–326 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05707-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RWTH Aachen University, 52078, Aachen, Germany

    Astrid Rosenthal-von der Pütten & Anna M. H. Abrams

Authors
  1. Astrid Rosenthal-von der Pütten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna M. H. Abrams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Astrid Rosenthal-von der Pütten .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Siemens, Princeton, USA

    Helmut Degen

  2. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Lauren Reinerman-Jones

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Rosenthal-von der Pütten, A., Abrams, A.M.H. (2020). Social Dynamics in Human-Robot Groups – Possible Consequences of Unequal Adaptation to Group Members Through Machine Learning in Human-Robot Groups. In: Degen, H., Reinerman-Jones, L. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in HCI. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12217. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50334-5_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50334-5_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50333-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50334-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation