Advertisement

The Importance of Mutual Gaze in Human-Robot Interaction

  • Kyveli Kompatsiari
  • Vadim Tikhanoff
  • Francesca Ciardo
  • Giorgio Metta
  • Agnieszka Wykowska
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10652)

Abstract

Mutual gaze is a key element of human development, and constitutes an important factor in human interactions. In this study, we examined –through analysis of subjective reports– the influence of an online eye-contact of a humanoid robot on humans’ reception of the robot. To this end, we manipulated the robot gaze, i.e., mutual (social) gaze and neutral (non-social) gaze, throughout an experiment involving letter identification. Our results suggest that people are sensitive to the mutual gaze of an artificial agent, they feel more engaged with the robot when a mutual gaze is established, and eye-contact supports attributing human-like characteristics to the robot. These findings are relevant both to the human-robot interaction (HRI) research - enhancing social behavior of robots, and also for cognitive neuroscience - studying mechanisms of social cognition in relatively realistic social interactive scenarios.

Keywords

Social human-robot interaction iCub Mutual gaze 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant awarded to A. Wykowska, titled “InStance: Intentional Stance for Social Attunement. Grant agreement No: 715058).

References

  1. 1.
    Schilbach, L., Timmermans, B., Reddy, V., Costall, A., Bente, G., Schlicht, T., Vogeley, K.: A second-person neuroscience in interaction. Behav. Brain Sci. 36(4), 441–462 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schilbach, L., Wohlschlaeger, A.M., Kraemer, N.C., Newen, A., Shah, N.J., Fink, G.R., Vogeley, K.: Being with virtual others: neural correlates of social interaction. Neuropsychologia 44(5), 718–730 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bolis, D., Schilbach, L.: Observing and participating in social interactions: action perception and action control across the autistic spectrum. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wykowska, A., Chaminade, T., Cheng, G.: Embodied artificial agents for understanding human social cognition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 371(1693), 20150375 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jung, Y., Kwan, M.L.: Effects of physical embodiment on social presence of social robots. In: Proceedings of PRESENCE, Valencia, pp. 80–87 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oztop, E., Franklin, D.W., Chaminade, T., Cheng, G.: Human–humanoid interaction: is a humanoid robot perceived as a human? Int. J. Hum. Robot. 2(04), 537–559 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Press, C., Bird, G., Flach, R., Heyes, C.: Robotic movement elicits automatic imitation. Cogn. Brain. Res. 25(3), 632–640 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wykowska, A., Chellali, R., Al-Amin, M.M., Müller, H.J.: Implications of robot actions for human perception. How do we represent actions of the observed robots? Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6(3), 357–366 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wiese, E., Wykowska, A., Zwickel, J., Müller, H.J.: I see what you mean: how attentional selection is shaped by ascribing intentions to others. PLoS ONE 7(9), e45391 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sciutti, A., Ansuini, C., Becchio, C., Sandini, G.: Investigating the ability to read others’ intentions using humanoid robots. Front. Psychol. 6 (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wykowska, A., Kajopoulos, J., Obando-Leitón, M., Chauhan, S.S., Cabibihan, J.J., Cheng, G.: Humans are well tuned to detecting agents among non-agents: examining the sensitivity of human perception to behavioral characteristics of intentional systems. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(5), 767–781 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wykowska, A., Kajopoulos, J., Ramirez-Amaro, K., Cheng, G.: Autistic traits and sensitivity to human-like features of robot behavior. Interact. Stud. 16(2), 219–248 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Argyle, M., Cook, M.: Gaze and mutual gaze (1976)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Macrae, C.N., Hood, B.M., Milne, A.B., Rowe, A.C., Mason, M.F.: Are you looking at me? Eye gaze and person perception. Psychol. Sci. 13(5), 460–464 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Senju, A., Johnson, M.H.: The eye contact effect: mechanisms and development. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13(3), 127–134 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kleinke, C.L.: Gaze and eye contact: a research review. Psychol. Bull. 100(1), 78 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hamilton, A.F.D.C.: Gazing at me: the importance of social meaning in understanding direct-gaze cues. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 371(1686), 20150080 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Farroni, T., Csibra, G., Simion, F., Johnson, M.H.: Eye contact detection in humans from birth. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99(14), 9602–9605 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Batki, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Connellan, J., Ahluwalia, J.: Is there an innate gaze module? Evidence from human neonates. Infant Behav. Dev. 23(2), 223–229 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Farroni, T., Mansfield, E.M., Lai, C., Johnson, M.H.: Infants perceiving and acting on the eyes: tests of an evolutionary hypothesis. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 85(3), 199–212 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Senju, A., Csibra, G.: Gaze following in human infants depends on communicative signals. Curr. Biol. 18(9), 668–671 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mason, M.F., Tatkow, E.P., Macrae, C.N.: The look of love: gaze shifts and person perception. Psychol. Sci. 16(3), 236–239 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Conty, L., Tijus, C., Hugueville, L., Coelho, E., George, N.: Searching for asymmetries in the detection of gaze contact versus averted gaze under different head views: a behavioural study. Spat. Vis. 19(6), 529–545 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Senju, A., Hasegawa, T.: Direct gaze captures visuospatial attention. Vis. Cogn. 12(1), 127–144 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hood, B.M., Macrae, C.N., Cole-Davies, V., Dias, M.: Eye remember you: The effects of gaze direction on face recognition in children and adults. Dev. Sci. 6(1), 67–71 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yonezawa, T., Yamazoe, H., Utsumi, A., Abe, S.: Gaze-communicative behavior of stuffed-toy robot with joint attention and eye contact based on ambient gaze-tracking. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, pp. 140–145. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ito, A., Hayakawa, S., Terada, T.: Why robots need body for mind communication-an attempt of eye-contact between human and robot. In: 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, ROMAN 2004, pp. 473–478. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Choi, J.J., Kim, Y., Kwak, S.S.: Have you ever lied? The impacts of gaze avoidance on people’s perception of a robot. In: 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 105–106. IEEE, March 2013Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Admoni, H., Scassellati, B.: Social eye gaze in human-robot interaction: a review. J. Hum. Robot Interact. 6(1), 25–63 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Metta, G., Sandini, G., Vernon, D., Natale, L., Nori, F.: The iCub humanoid robot: an open platform for research in embodied cognition. In: Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems, pp. 50–56. ACM, August 2008Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roncone, A., Pattacini, U., Metta, G., Natale L.: A cartesian 6-DoF gaze controller for humanoid robots. In: Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, Ann Arbor, MI, 18–22 June 2016Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyveli Kompatsiari
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vadim Tikhanoff
    • 3
  • Francesca Ciardo
    • 1
  • Giorgio Metta
    • 3
    • 4
  • Agnieszka Wykowska
    • 1
    • 5
  1. 1.Social Cognition in Human-Robot InteractionIstituto Italiano di TecnologiaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Ludwig Maximilian UniversityPlaneggGermany
  3. 3.iCub FacilityIstituto Italiano di TecnologiaGenoaItaly
  4. 4.University of PlymouthPlymouthUK
  5. 5.Luleå University of TechnologyLuleåSweden

Personalised recommendations