Advertisement

From HCI to HRI: About Users, Acceptance and Emotions

  • Tanja HeuerEmail author
  • Jenny Stein
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1026)

Abstract

HCI and HRI are two fields where a human being plays the main role. For this reason it is essential to investigate acceptance and its factors. As HRI is a relatively new and complex field, it is even more important to examine the wider range of acceptance coefficients. Therefore, we compare existing HRI acceptance models with existing HCI attitude models to point out missing factors in HRI. We could show that acceptance models leave out important factors although they should have been build upon HCI models and adapted according to extended influencing factors. Instead a new model is set up with “new” factors and “old” HCI elements such as cognitive components are left out. The cognitive component of attitude investigates the correlation of experience and situated knowledge.

Keywords

HRI HCI Mental models Acceptance User-centered Design Interaction 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry for Science and Culture of Lower Saxony as part of the program “Gendered Configurations of Humans and Machines (KoMMa.G)”.

References

  1. 1.
    Heinecke, A.M.: Mensch-Computer-Interaktion: Basiswissen für Entwickler und Gestalter. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Huang, W.: When HCI meets HRI: the intersection and distinction (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sucar, O.I., Aviles, S.H., Miranda-Palma, C.: From HCI to HRI-usability inspection in multimodal human-robot interactions. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, ROMAN 2003, pp. 37–41. IEEE, November 2003Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dautenhahn, Kerstin: Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human–robot interaction. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 362(1480), 679–704 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3), 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin, P., Abney, K., Bekey, G.A.: Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anderson, J.: The Architecture of Cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    van Harreveld, F., Nohlen, H.U., Schneider, I.K.: The ABC of ambivalence: affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of attitudinal conflict. In: Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 52, pp. 285–324. Academic Press (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V., Wielinga, B.: Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int. J. Social Robot. 2(4), 361–375 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shin, D.H., Choo, H.: Modeling the acceptance of socially interactive robotics: social presence in human-robot interaction. Interact. Stud. 12(3), 430–460 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1075/is.12.3.04shiCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N.: The history of mental models. In: Psychology of Reasoning, pp. 189–222. Psychology Press (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Knauff, M.: Mentales modell. In: Wirtz, M.A. (Hrsg.), Dorsch – Lexikon der Psychologie. Zugriff am 05.11.2017 unter (2017). https://m.portal.hogrefe.com/dorsch/mentales-modell/
  13. 13.
    Rosenberg, M.J., Hovland, C.I.: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral components of attitude. In: Rosenberg, M.J., Hovland, C.I., McGuire, W.J., Abelson, R.P., Brehm, J.W. (eds.) Attitude Organization and Change: An Analysis of Consistency Among Attitude Components, pp. 1–14. Yale University Press, New Haven (1960)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Breckler, S.J.: Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 47(6), 1191–1205 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Young, J.E., Sung, J., Voida, A., Sharlin, E., Igarashi, T., Christensen, H.I., Grinter, R.E.: Evaluating human-robot interaction. Int. J. Social Robot. 3(1), 53–67 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B., Davis, F.D.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27(3), 425–478 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weiss, A., Bernhaupt, R., Lankes, M., Tscheligi, M.: The USUS evaluation framework for human-robot interaction. In: AISB2009: Proceedings of the Symposium on New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 4, pp. 11–26, April 2009Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceOstfalia University of Applied SciencesWolfenbüttelGermany
  2. 2.Department of Electrical EngineeringOstfalia University of Applied SciencesWolfenbüttelGermany

Personalised recommendations