International Journal of Social Robotics

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 243–248 | Cite as

“I Love This Dog”—Children’s Emotional Attachment to the Robotic Dog AIBO

  • Astrid Weiss
  • Daniela Wurhofer
  • Manfred Tscheligi
Original Paper

Abstract

In this paper we present a methodological variation of assessing emotional attachment of children and adults to the robotic pet AIBO, using an atypical application area (a shopping mall) and leaving the participation in the study as totally voluntary. This free exploration case study was situated in a shopping mall for three reasons: People do not expect a robotic pet in this context (first time reaction) and the context allows to address a high number of possible participants and to create an awareness for robots in general. To investigate the methodological concept and to find out if such a setting can be beneficial for a better understanding of the influence of first time contact with a robotic pet to the emotional attachment, we conducted the case study on three consecutive work days. We could show that this method reveals interesting and novel aspects on the development of emotional attachment.

Keywords

Emotional attachment Children AIBO HRI Robotic pet Case study 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bowlby J (1958) The nature of the child’s tie to his mother. Int J Psychoanal 39:350–373 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Friedman B, Kahn PHJ, Borning A (2002) Value sensitive design: Theory and methods (uw cse technical report 02-12-01). Tech. rep., Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Seattle: University of Washington Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Friedman B, Kahn PHJ, Hagman J (2003) Hardware companions?: What online aibo discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In: Proceedings of CHI 2003, ACM Press, pp 273–280 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gockley R, Forlizzi J, Simmons R (2006) Interactions with a moody robot. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on human–robot interaction, ACM Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp 186–193 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones CM, Deeming A (2007) Investigating emotional interaction with a robotic dog. In: Proceedings of the 2007 conference of the computer–human interaction special interest group (Chisig) of Australia on computer–human interaction: design: activities, artifacts and environments, vol 251. ACM Press, Adelaide, Australia Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahn PH, Friedman B, Perez-Granados DR, Freier NG (2004) Robotic pets in the lives of preschool children. In: Proceedings of CHI 2004, pp 1449–1452 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaplan F (2000) Free creatures: The role of uselessness in the design of artificial pets. In: Proceedings of the 1st edutainment robotics workshop Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaplan F (2001) Artificial attachment: Will a robot ever pass the ainsworth’s strange situation test? In: Proceedings of humanoids 2001: IEEE-RAS international conference on humanoid robots, pp 125–132 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marti P, Pollini A, Rullo A, Shibata T (2005) Engaging with artificial pets. In: Proceedings of the 2005 annual conference on European association of cognitive ergonomics, ACM international conference proceeding series, vol 132, pp 99–106 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Melson G, Kahn P, Beck AM, Friedman B, Roberts T, Garrett E (2005) Robots as dogs?—children’s interactions with the robotic dog aibo and a live Australian shepherd. In: Proceedings of CHI 2005, pp 1649–1652 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norman DA (2004) Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. Basic Books, New York Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reeves B, Nass C (1998) The media equation: How People treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, New York Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sabanovic S, Michalowski M, Simmons R (2006) Robots in the wild: Observing human-robot social interaction outside the lab. In: Proceedings of AMC’06, Istanbul, pp 596–601 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shiomi M, Kanda T, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2006) Interactive humanoid robots for a science museum. In: HRI’06, ACM Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp 129–136 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sony (2005) ERS-7M3 Entertainment Robot Aibo, for Aibo Mind 3, User’s Guide (Basic). Sony Corporation Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stubbs K, Hinds P, Wettergreen D (2006) Challenges to grounding in human–robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on human–robot interaction, ACM, Salt Lake City, Utah, pp 357–358 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sung J, Guo L, Grinter R, Christensen H (2006) My roomba is rambo: Intimate home appliances. In: Proceedings of UbiComp 2007, Innsbruck, Austria, pp 146–162 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wehmeyer K (2007) Assessing users’ attachment to their mobile devices. In: Proceedings of the international conference on the management of mobile business Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yanco H, Dury J (2002) A taxonomy for human-robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the AAAI fall symposium on human–robot interaction, Falmouth, Massachusetts, pp 111–119 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science & Business Media BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Astrid Weiss
    • 1
  • Daniela Wurhofer
    • 1
  • Manfred Tscheligi
    • 1
  1. 1.ICT&S CenterUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations