International Journal of Social Robotics

, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp 155–164 | Cite as

Influences of Evaluation and Gaze from a Robot and Humans’ Fear of Negative Evaluation on Their Preferences of the Robot

Article

Abstract

To investigate influences of evaluation from robots, gazes from the robots, and humans’ fear of negative evaluation (FNE) into the humans’ preferences of the robots, we conducted an experiment in which a human-sized robot is used for an advisory role, providing suggestion in foreign-language education. There were three independent variables controlled: evaluation from robot (evaluative vs. non-evaluative robot), users’ FNE (low FNE vs. high FNE), and gaze from robot (refrained gazes vs. normal gazes), and dependent variables were participants’ preferences of the robot as subjective measures and amount of utterances as an objective measure. The experimental results suggested that when the robot evaluated participants with a lower FNE, they preferred to use the robot with normal gaze behavior more than those with a higher FNE. While the effect of refrained gaze is not clear for people with higher FNE, for people with lower FNE, refrained gaze reduced their intention to participate when the robot evaluated them. Moreover, the experimental results suggested that persons having higher FNE tend to trust the robot more, and participants spoke more when the robot did not evaluate them and when it used the normal gaze. This paper discusses the implications for applications with potential evaluation capability, e.g. for healthcare and education.

Keywords

Human–robot interaction Evaluation from a robot Fear of negative evaluation Gaze 

References

  1. 1.
    Bickmore TW, Picard RW (2005) Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer interaction. ACM Trans Comput Human Interact 12:293–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kidd C (2008) Designing for long-term human-robot interaction and application to weight loss. Ph.D. thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nass C, Jonsson IM, Harris H, Reaves B, Endo J (2005) Improving automotive safety by pairing driver emotion and car voice emotion. In: Proceedings of ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI2005), pp 1973–1976Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Saerbeck M, Schut T, Bartneck C, Janse MD (2010) Expressive robots in education: varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor. In: Proceedings of ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI2010), pp 1613–1622Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brave S, Nass C, Hutchinson K (2005) Computers that care: Investigating the effects of orientation of emotion exhibited by an embodied computer agent. Int J Hum Comput Stud 62:161–178Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Watson JB, Friend R (1969) Measurement of social-evaluation anxiety. J Consult Clin Psychol 33:448–457Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leary MR (1983) Understanding social anxiety: social, personality, and clinical perspectives. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horley K, Williamsa L, Gonsalvezb C, Gordon E (2003) Social phobics do not see eye to eye: a visual scanpath study of emotional expression processing. J Anxiety Disord 17:33–44Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Iizuka Y (1995) A study on the relationship of shyness and gaze. Jap J Psychol 66:277–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pertaub DP, Slater M, Barker C (2001) An experiment on fear of public speaking in virtual reality. Stud Health Technol Inf 81:372–378Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stafford RQ, MacDonald BA, Li X, Broadbent E (2014) Older people’s prior robot attitudes influence evaluations of a conversational robot. Int J Soc Robot 6:281–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Welch KC, Lahiri U, Warren Z, Sarkar N (2010) An approach to the design of socially acceptable robots for children with autism spectrum disorders. Int J Soc Robot 2:391–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ishikawa R, Sasaki K, Hukui I (1992) Standardization of Japanese version of fne and sads. Jap J Behav Ther 18:10–17Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2:361–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Joinson AN (2001) Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. Euro J Soc Psychol 31:177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kang SH, Gratch J (2010) Virtual humans elicit socially anxious interactants’ verbal self-disclosure. Comput Animat Virtual Worlds 21:473–482Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hofmann SG, Asnaani A, Hilton DE (2010) Cultural aspects in social anxiety and social anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety 27:1117–1127CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Media InformaticsRyukoku UniversityOtsuJapan
  2. 2.ATR Intelligent Robotics and Communication LaboratoriesKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations