Path Analysis for the Halo Effect of Touch Sensations of Robots on Their Personality Impressions

  • Yuki Yamashita
  • Hisashi IshiharaEmail author
  • Takashi Ikeda
  • Minoru Asada
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9979)


Physical human–robot interaction plays an important role in social robotics, and touch is one of the key factors that influences human’s impression of robots. However, very few studies have explored different conditions, and therefore, few systematic results have been obtained. As the first step toward addressing this issue, we studied the types of impressions of robot personality that humans may experience when they touch a soft part of a robot. In the study, the left forearm of a child-like android robot “Affetto” was exposed; this forearm was made of silicone rubber and can be replaced with one of other three forearms providing different sensations of hardness upon touching. Participants were asked to touch the robot’s forearm and to fill evaluation questionnaires on 19 touch sensations and 46 personality impressions under each of four conditions with different forearms. Four impression factors for touch sensations and three for personality impressions were extracted from the evaluation scores by the factor analysis method. The causal relationships between these factors were analyzed by the path analysis method. Several significant causal relationships were found, for example, between preferable touch sensations and likable personality impressions. The results will help design robots’ personality impression by designing touch sensations more systematically.


Path Analysis Silicone Rubber Humanoid Robot Halo Effect Touch Sensation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research is supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Specially Promoted Research No. 24000012 and for Young Scientist (B) No. 15K18006 and by the Center of Innovation Program from MEXT and JST.


  1. 1.
    Argall, B.D., Billard, A.G.: A survey of tactile human-robot interactions. Robot. Auton. Syst. 58(10), 1159–1176 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Hagita, N.: Is the uncanny valley an uncanny cliff? In: The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 368–373 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castro-Gonzlez, A., Admoni, H., Scassellati, B.: Effects of form and motion on judgments of social robots’ animacy, likability, trustworthiness and unpleasantness. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 90, 27–38 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cooney, M.D., Nishio, S., Ishiguro, H.: Importance of touch for conveying affection in a multimodal interaction with a small humanoid robot. Int. J. Humanoid Robot. 12(01), 1550002 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cramer, B.H., Kemper, N., Amin, A., Wielinga, B., Evers, V.: ‘Give me a hug’: the effects of touch and autonomy on people’s responses to embodied social agents. Comput. Animation Virtual Worlds 20, 437–445 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cramer, H., Kemper, N.A., Amin, A., Evers, V.: The effects of robot touch and proactive behaviour on perceptions of human-robot interactions. In: International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, pp. 275–276 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ekman, P.: Communication through nonverbal behavior: a source of information about an interpersonal relationship. In: Affect, Cognition and Personality, pp. 390–442 (1965)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Endo, N., Iida, F., Endo, K., Mizoguchi, Y., Zecca, M., Takanishi, A.: Development of the anthropomorphic soft robotic hand WSH-1R. In: Proceedings of the First IFToMM Asian Conference on Mechanism and Machine Science, p. 250162 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goetz, J., Kiesler, S., Powers, A.: Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 55–60 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Inoue, M., Kobayashi, T.: The research domain and scale construction of adjective-pairs in a semantic differential method in Japan. Japan. J. Educ. Psychol. 33(3), 253–260 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ishihara, H., Asada, M.: Design of 22-DOF pneumatically actuated upper body for child android ‘Affetto’. Adv. Robot. 29(18), 1151–1163 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kanda, T., Miyashita, T., Osada, T., Haikawa, Y., Ishiguro, H.: Analysis of humanoid appearances in human-robot interaction. IEEE Trans. Robot. 24(3), 725–735 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanoh, M., Shimizu, T.: Developing a robot Babyloid that cannot do anything. J. Robot. Soc. Japan (In Japanese) 29(3), 298–305 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kozima, H., Michalowski, M.P., Nakagawa, C.: Keepon: a playful robot for research, therapy, and entertainment. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 1(1), 3–18 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee, J.K., Stiehl, W.D., Toscano, R.L., Breazeal, C.: Semi-autonomous robot Avatar as a medium for family communication and education. Adv. Robot. 23(14), 1925–1949 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Macdorman, K.F.: Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness, familiarity, and eeriness: an exploration of the uncanny valley. In: ICCS/CogSci-2006 Long Symposium: Toward Social Mechanisms of Android Science (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Minato, T., Yoshikawa, Y., Noda, T., Ikemoto, S., Ishiguro, H., Asada, M.: CB2: a child robot with biomimetic body for cognitive developmental robotics. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Humanoid Robots, pp. 557–562 (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Minato, T., Nishio, S., Ishiguro, H.: Evoking affection for a communication partner by a robotic communication medium. In: HRI Demonstration session, p. D07 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mori, Y., Saito, Y., Kamide, H.: Evaluation of impression for hug dolls. J. Japan Soc. Kansei Eng. 11(1), 9–15 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nisbett, R.E., Wilson, T.D.: The halo effect: evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. J. Feisonality Soc. Psychol. 35(4), 250–256 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Osgood, C.E.: The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychol. Bull. 49(3), 197–237 (1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poel, M., Heylen, D., Nijholt, A., Meulemans, M., Breemen, A.: Gaze behaviour, believability, likability and the iCat. AI Soc. 24(1), 61–73 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Scherer, K.: Vocal communication of emotion: a review of research paradigms. Speech Commun. 40(1–2), 227–256 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shibata, T., Wada, K.: Robot therapy: a new approach for mental healthcare of the elderly - a mini-review. Gerontology 57(4), 378–386 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shirado, H., Nonomura, Y., Maeno, T.: Development of artificial skin having human skin-like texture. Trans. Japan Soc. Mech. Eng. Ser. C 73(726), 541–546 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yohanan, S., MacLean, K.E.: The role of affective touch in human-robot interaction: human intent and expectations in touching the haptic creature. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 4(2), 163–180 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuki Yamashita
    • 1
  • Hisashi Ishihara
    • 1
    Email author
  • Takashi Ikeda
    • 2
  • Minoru Asada
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of EngineeringOsaka UniversitySuitaJapan
  2. 2.Research Center for Child Mental DevelopmentKanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations