Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Telecommunication Experience with Full-Body Ownership Humanoid Robot

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

“Beaming” systems aim to physically transfer a person to a remote place and whilst many researchers have attempted to facilitate a beaming system based on technological advances in teleoperation, robotics, and virtual reality; however, telecommunication experiences with full-body ownership have not yet been rigorously investigated. The present study aims to develop a beaming system that provide a full-body ownership through a humanoid robot, and investigate users’ telecommunication experiences as roles of visitor and local with different levels of controllability. Forty participants were assigned to both visitor and local roles, and their copresence, usability, eye-contact, emotion, verbal, and gesture communications were investigated. The results suggested that the subjective reports on the telecommunication experience of the visitors were generally controlled in a stepwise manner depending on the level of embodiment controllability, whereas that of the locals were not. However, participants’ emotion, verbal, and gesture communications showed synchronizing tendencies between the visitor and the local. The implications of these results for future physical beaming systems are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Steed A, Steptoe W, Oyekoya W, Pece F, Weyrich T, Kautz J, Friedman D, Peer A, Solazzi M, Tecchia F, Bergamasco M, Slater M (2012) Beaming: An Asymmetric Telepresence System. IEEE Comput Grap Appl 32:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1109/mcg.2012.110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kishore S, Muncunill XN, Bourdin P, Or-Berkers K, Friedman D, Slater M (2016) Multi-Destination Beaming: Apparently Being in Three Places at Once through Robotic and Virtual Embodiment. Front Robot AI 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2016.00065

  3. Heshmat Y, Jones B, Xiong X, Neustaedter C, Tang A, Riecke BE, Yang L (2018) Geocaching with a Beam. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173933

  4. Kratz S, Rabelo Ferriera F (2016) Immersed remotely: Evaluating the use of Head Mounted Devices for remote collaboration in robotic telepresence. 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). https://doi.org/10.1109/roman.2016.7745185

  5. Sheridan TB (1992) Musings on Telepresence and Virtual Presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1:120–126. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1992.1.1.120

  6. Adalgeirsson SO, Breazeal C (2010) MeBot: A robotic platform for socially embodied telepresence. 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). https://doi.org/10.1109/hri.2010.5453272

  7. Golub E, McNally B, Lewittes B, Shorter A, Kidsteam TK (2017) Life as a Robot (at CHI). Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3052761

  8. Shi Y, Xie W, Xu G, Shi R, Chen E, Mao Y (2003) The smart classroom: merging technologies for seamless tele-education. IEEE Pervasive Comput 2:47–55. https://doi.org/10.1109/mprv.2003.1203753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Major S, Sawan L, Vognsen J, Jabre M (2020) COVID-19 pandemic prompts the development of a Web-OSCE using Zoom teleconferencing to resume medical students’ clinical skills training at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar. BMJ Simul Technol Enhanc Learn 6:376–377. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjstel-2020-000629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakanishi H, Kato K, Ishiguro H (2011) Zoom cameras and movable displays enhance social telepresence. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1978953

  11. Nakanishi H, Murakami Y, Kato K (2009) Movable cameras enhance social telepresence in media spaces. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518771

  12. Young J, Langlotz T, Cook M, Mills S, Regenbrecht H (2019) Immersive Telepresence and Remote Collaboration using Mobile and Wearable Devices. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics 25:1908–1918. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvcg.2019.2898737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Rae I, Mutlu B, Takayama L (2014) Bodies in motion. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557047

  14. Leithinger D, Follmer S, Olwal A, Ishii H (2014) Physical telepresence. Proceedings of the 27th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. https://doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647377

  15. Ballantyne GH (2002) Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and telementoring. Surg Endosc 16:1389–1402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8283-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chitwood WR Jr, Nifong LW, Elbeery JE, Chapman WH, Albrecht R, Kim V, Young JA (2000) Robotic mitral valve repair: Trapezoidal resection and prosthetic annuloplasty with the da Vinci Surgical System. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 120:1171–1172. https://doi.org/10.1067/mtc.2000.110177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Isgro F, Kiessling AH, Blome M, Lehmann A, Kumle B, Saggau W (2003) Robotic Surgery Using Zeus™ MicroWrist™ Technology. J Card Surg 18:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-8191.2003.01901.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nagendran A, Steed A, Kelly B, Pan Y (2015) Symmetric telepresence using robotic humanoid surrogates. Comp Anim Virtual Worlds 26:271–280. https://doi.org/10.1002/cav.1638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chaminade T, Cheng G (2009) Social cognitive neuroscience and humanoid robotics. J Physiology-Paris 103:286–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphysparis.2009.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fiske S, Taylor SE (2013) Social Cognition: from brains to culture. SAGE, California

    Book  Google Scholar 

  21. Kiilavuori H, Sariola V, Peltola MJ, Hietanen JK (2021) Making eye contact with a robot: Psychophysiological responses to eye contact with a human and with a humanoid robot. Biol Psychol 158:107989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2020.107989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim M, Kwon T, Kim K (2017) Can Human–Robot Interaction Promote the Same Depth of Social Information Processing as Human–Human Interaction? Int J of Soc Robotics 10:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0428-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Dörrenbächer J, Löffler D, Hassenzahl M (2020) Becoming a Robot - Overcoming Anthropomorphism with Techno-Mimesis. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376507

  24. Brown L, Howard AM (2013) Engaging children in math education using a socially interactive humanoid robot. 2013 13th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids). https://doi.org/10.1109/humanoids.2013.7029974

  25. Alemi M, Ghanbarzadeh A, Meghdari A, Moghadam LJ (2015) Clinical Application of a Humanoid Robot in Pediatric Cancer Interventions. Int J of Soc Robotics 8:743–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0294-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Robins B, Dautenhahn K, Dickerson P (2009) From Isolation to Communication: A Case Study Evaluation of Robot Assisted Play for Children with Autism with a Minimally Expressive Humanoid Robot. 2009 Second International Conferences on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. https://doi.org/10.1109/achi.2009.32

  27. Gallagher S (2000) Philosophical conceptions of the self: implications for cognitive science. Trends Cogn Sci 4:14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01417-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kim CS, Jung M, Kim SY, Kim K (2020) Controlling the Sense of Embodiment for Virtual Avatar Applications: Methods and Empirical Study. JMIR Serious Games 8:e21879. https://doi.org/10.2196/21879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Longo MR, Schüür F, Kammers MPM, Tsakiris M, Haggard P (2008) What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition 107:978–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Botvinick M, Cohen J (1998) Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391:756–756. https://doi.org/10.1038/35784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Aymerich-Franch L, Petit D, Ganesh G, Kheddar A (2017) Non-human Looking Robot Arms Induce Illusion of Embodiment. Int J of Soc Robotics 9:479–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0397-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Aymerich-Franch L, Petit D, Ganesh G, Kheddar A (2016) The second me: Seeing the real body during humanoid robot embodiment produces an illusion of bi-location. Conscious Cogn 46:99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.09.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Aymerich-Franch L, Kishore S, Slater M (2019) When Your Robot Avatar Misbehaves You Are Likely to Apologize: An Exploration of Guilt During Robot Embodiment. Int J of Soc Robotics 12:217–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00556-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kim S-Y, Park H, Jung M, Kim K (Kenny) Impact of Body Size Match to an Avatar on the Body Ownership Illusion and User’s Subjective Experience. Cyberpsychology (2020) Behavior, and Social Networking 23:234–241. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0136

  35. Derogatis LR, Unger R (2010) Symptom Checklist-90-Revised. The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0970

  36. Koenemann J, Bennewitz M (2012) Whole-body imitation of human motions with a nao humanoid. Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI ’12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157689.2157830

  37. Smith HJ, Neff M (2018) Communication Behavior in Embodied Virtual Reality. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173863

  38. Bradley MM, Lang PJ (1994) Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry 25:49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mcneil D (2005) Gesture and Thought. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Choi C, Jun J, Heo J, Kim K (eds) (2019) (Kenny) Effects of virtual-avatar motion-synchrony levels on full-body interaction. Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing. https://doi.org/10.1145/3297280.3297346

  41. Jun J, Jung M, Kim S-Y, Kim K, Kenny) (2018) ( Full-Body Ownership Illusion Can Change Our Emotion. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174175

  42. Rizzolatti G, Craighero L (2004) THE MIRROR-NEURON SYSTEM. Annu Rev Neurosci 27:169–192. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fay WH, Colleman RO (1977) A human sound transducer/reproducer: Temporal capabilities of a profoundly echolalic child. Brain Lang 4:396–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/0093-934x(77)90034-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Chartrand TL, Bargh JA (1999) The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. J Personal Soc Psychol 76:893–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Baird AD, Scheffer IE, Wilson SJ (2011) Mirror neuron system involvement in empathy: A critical look at the evidence. Soc Neurosci 6:327–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2010.547085

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) (No. 2021R1A2C2013479, No. 2018R1A5A7059549) grant funded by the Korea government (*MSIT). *Ministry of Science and ICT.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Myeongul Jung & Kwanguk (Kenny) Kim

  2. Department of Psychology, Duksung Women’s University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Jejoong Kim

  3. School of Intelligence Computing, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Kyungsik Han

  4. Human-Computer Interaction Lab, Hanyang University, 267 Wangsimni-ro, Seongdong-gu, 133-791, Seoul, Korea

    Kwanguk (Kenny) Kim

Authors
  1. Myeongul Jung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jejoong Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kyungsik Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kwanguk (Kenny) Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kwanguk (Kenny) Kim.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jung, M., Kim, J., Han, K. et al. Social Telecommunication Experience with Full-Body Ownership Humanoid Robot. Int J of Soc Robotics 14, 1951–1964 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00922-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-022-00922-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation