Human-Agent and Human-Robot Interaction Theory: Similarities to and Differences from Human-Human Interaction

  • Nicole C. Krämer
  • Astrid von der Pütten
  • Sabrina Eimler
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 396)

Abstract

It will be discussed whether a theory specific for human-robot and human-agent interaction is needed or whether theories from human-human interactions can be adapted. First, theories from human-human interaction will be presented. Then, empirical evidence from human-robot- and human-agent interaction is presented. Research suggests that, from the perspective of the user, interaction with an artificial entity is similar to interaction with fellow humans. Explanations for this treatment of agents/robots in a social way (such as the ethopoeia approach, Nass& Moon, 2000) assume that due to our social nature humans will use their interaction routines also when confronted with artificial entities. Based on this it will be discussed whether theories from human-human-interaction will be a helpful framework also for human-agent/robot interaction, whether amendments will be beneficial or whether, alternatively, a totally new approach is needed.

Keywords

Common Ground Perspective Taking Social Exchange Theory Virtual Agent Virtual Human 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argyle, M., Dean, J.: Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry 28, 289–304 (1965)Google Scholar
  2. Astington, J.: What is theoretical about the child´s theory of mind? A Vygotskian view of its development. In: Carruthers, P., Smith, P.K. (eds.) Theories of theories of mind, pp. 184–199. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  3. Bailenson, J.N., Blascovich, J., Beall, A.C., Loomis, J.M.: Equilibrium theory revis-ited: Mutual gaze and personal space in virtual environments. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 10, 583–598 (2001)Google Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M.M.: Discourse in the novel. In: Holquist, M. (ed.) The Dialog Imagination: Four Essays by M.M. Bakhtin, pp. 359–422. University of Texas Press, Austin (1981)Google Scholar
  5. Baldwin, J.M.: Social and ethical interpretations of mental development. Macmillan, New York (1906)Google Scholar
  6. Banks, M.R., Willoughby, L.M., Banks, W.A.: Animal-Assisted Therapy and Lone-liness in Nursing Homes: Use of Robotic versus Living Dogs. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 9(3), 173–177 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. Baron-Cohen, S.: Mindblindness. An essay on autism and theory of mind. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  8. Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R.: The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin 117, 497–529 (1995)Google Scholar
  9. Bente, G., Vorderer, P.: The socio-emotional dimension of using screen media.Current perspectives in German Media Psychology. In: Winterhoff-Spurk, P., van der Voort, T. (eds.) Psychology of Media in Europe 2: Perspectives for Cooperative Research. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen (1997)Google Scholar
  10. Bell, L., Gustafson, J.: Repetition and its phonetic realizations: Investigating a Swedish database of spontaneous computer-directed speech. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Phonetic Sciences, vol. 2, pp. 1221–1224 (1999)Google Scholar
  11. Berscheid, E.: Interpersonal attraction. In: Linzey, G., Aronson, E. (eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 413–484. Random House, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  12. Berscheid, E., Peplau, L.A.: The emerging science of relationships. In: Kelley, H.H., Berscheid, E., Christensen, A., Harvey, J.H., Huston, T.L., Levinger, G., McClintock, E., Peplau, L.A., Peterson, D.R. (eds.) Close Relationships, pp. 1–19. Freeman, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  13. Berscheid, E., Reis, H.T.: Attraction and close relationships. In: Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T., Lindzey, G. (eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th edn., pp. 193–281. McGraw-Hill, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  14. Berscheid, E., Walster, E.: Interpersonal Attraction. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1978)Google Scholar
  15. Bickmore, T.W., Picard, R.W.: Establishing and maintaining long-term human-computer relationships. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 12(2), 293–327 (2005)Google Scholar
  16. Bickmore, T., Gruber, A., Picard, R.: Establishing the computer-patient working alliance in automated health behavior change interventions. Patient Education Counseling 59(1), 21–30 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. Bickmore, T.: &Cassell, J. Social dialogue with embodied conversational agents. In: van Kuppevelt, J., Dybkjaer, L., Bernsen, N. (eds.) Natural, Intelligent and Effective Interaction with Multimodal Dialogue Systems. Kluwer Academic, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  18. Bui, K.-V.T., Peplau, L.A., Hill, C.T.: Testing the Rusbult model of relationship commitment and stability in a 15-year study of heterosexual couples. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22, 1244–1257 (1996)Google Scholar
  19. Burgoon, J., Stern, L., Dillman, L.: Interpersonal adaptation: dyadic interaction patterns. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  20. Blau, P.M.: Exchange and power in social life. Wiley, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  21. Breazeal, C., Brooks, A., Gray, C., Hoffman, G., Kidd, C., Lee, H., Lieberman, J., Lockerd, A., Chilongo, D.: Tutelage and Collaboration for Humanoid Robots. International Journal of Humanoid Robots 1(2), 315–348 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. Cacioppo, J.T., Patrick, B.: Loneliness: Human nature and the need for social connection. W. W. Norton & Company, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  23. Cassell, J., Bickmore, T.: External manifestations of trustworthiness in the interface. Communications of the ACM 43(12), 50–56 (2000)Google Scholar
  24. Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Campbell, L., Vilhjálmsson, H., Yan, H.: Human conversation as a system framework: Designing embodied conversational agents. In: Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., Churchill, E. (eds.) Embodied Conversational Agents, pp. 29–63. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  25. Cassell, J., Bickmore, T., Billinghurst, M., Campbell, L., Chang, K., Vilhjálmsson, H., Yan, H.: Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. In: Proceedings of the CHI 1999 Conference, pp. 520–527. ACM Press, New York (1999b)Google Scholar
  26. Cassell, J., Stocky, T., Bickmore, T., Gao, Y., Nakano, Y., Ryokai, K., Tversky, D., Vaucelle, C.: &Vilhjálmsson, H. MACK: Media lab Autonomous Conversational Kiosk. In: Proceedings of Imagina 2002, Monte Carlo, February 12-15, pp. 12–15 (2002)Google Scholar
  27. Carruthers, P., Smith, P.K. (eds.): Theories of theories of mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  28. Clark, H.H.: Language use and language users. In: Lindzey, G., Aronson, E. (eds.) Hand Book of Social Psychology, pp. 179–231. Random House, New York (1985)Google Scholar
  29. Clark, H.H.: Arenas of language use. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1992)Google Scholar
  30. Clark, H.H., Carlson, T.B.: Context for comprehension. In: Long, J., Baddeley, A. (eds.) Attention and performance IX, pp. 313–330. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1981)Google Scholar
  31. Clark, H.H., Haviland, S.E.: Comprehension and the given-new contract. In: Freedle, R.O. (ed.) Discourse Production and Comprehension, pp. 1–40. Ablex, Norwood, NJ (1977)Google Scholar
  32. Clark, H.H., Marshall, C.E.: Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In: Joshi, A.K., Sag, I., Webber, B. (eds.) Elements of Discourse Understanding, pp. 10–63. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1981)Google Scholar
  33. Clark, M.S., Mills, J.: The difference between communal and exchange relationships: What it is and is not. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19, 684–691 (1993)Google Scholar
  34. Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M.: The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53(6), 1024–1037 (1987)Google Scholar
  35. Dennett, D.C.: The intentional stance. MIT Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  36. Frith, U., Frith, C.D.: Development of neurophysiology of mentalizing. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond B Biol. Sci. 358, 459–473 (2003)Google Scholar
  37. Garau, M.S., Vinayagamoorthy, V., Brogni, A., Steed, A.: The Impact of Avatar Realism and Eye Gaze Control on Perceived Quality of Communication in a Shared Immersive Virtual Environment. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 2003, pp. 529–536. The Hague, The Netherlands (2003)Google Scholar
  38. Gong, L., Nass, C., Simard, C., Takhteyev, Y.: When Non Human Is Better Than Semi-Human: Consistency in Speech Interfaces. In: Smith, M.J., Salvendy, G., Harris, D., Koubek, R. (eds.) Usability Evaluation and Interface Design: Cognitive Engineering, Intelligent Agents, and Virtual Reality. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  39. Gopnik, A.: Theories and modules: creation myths, developmental realities and Neurath´s boat. In: Carruthers, P., Smith, P.K. (eds.) Theories of Mind, pp. 169–183. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  40. Gopnik, A.: How we know our minds: The illusion of first-person knowledge of inten-tionality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, 1–14 (1993)Google Scholar
  41. Gordon, R.: Folk psychology as simulation. In: Davies, M., Stone, T. (eds.) Folk psychology, vol. 3, pp. 60–73. Blackwell, England (1995)Google Scholar
  42. Gordon, R.: Folk psychology as simulation. Mind and Language 1, 158–171 (1986)Google Scholar
  43. Grammer, K., Filova, V.: &Fieder, M. The communication paradox and a possible solu-tion: Toward a radical empiricism. In: Schmitt, A., Atzwanger, K., Grammer, K., Schäfer, K. (eds.) New Aspects of Human Ethology, pp. 91–120. Plenum, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  44. Gratch, J., Rickel, J., Andre, E., Badler, N., Cassell, J., Petajan, E.: Creating Interactive Virtual Humans: Some Assembly Required. IEEE Intelligent Systems 17(4), 54–63 (2002)Google Scholar
  45. Graumann, C.F., Herrmann, T.: Speakers: The role of the listener. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon (1989)Google Scholar
  46. Grice, H.P.: Logic and Conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J. (eds.) Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3, pp. 41–58. Academic Press, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  47. Grice, H.P.: Meaning. Philosophical Review 66, 377–388 (1957)Google Scholar
  48. Hall, E.T.: The silent language. Doubleday, Garden City (1959)Google Scholar
  49. Hall, E.T.: The hidden dimension. Doubleday, Garden City (1966)Google Scholar
  50. Heal, J.: Replication and functionalism. In: Butterfield, J. (ed.) Language, Mind, and Logic, pp. 135–150. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  51. Heal, J.: Simulation, theory, and content. In: Carruthers, P., Smith, P.K. (eds.) Theories of Theories of Mind, pp. 75–89. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  52. Harris, P.L.: Children and emotion: The development of Psychological understanding. Blackwell, Oxford (1989)Google Scholar
  53. Humphrey, N.: Consciousness regained. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1984)Google Scholar
  54. Hoffmann, L., Krämer, N.C., Lam-chi, A., Kopp, S.: Media Equation Revisited: Do Users Show Polite Reactions towards an Embodied Agent? In: Ruttkay, Z., Kipp, M., Nijholt, A., Vilhjálmsson, H.H. (eds.) IVA 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5773, pp. 159–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  55. Homans, G.C.: Social behaviour: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace, New York (1961)Google Scholar
  56. Horten, D., Wohl, R.R.: Mass communication and parasocial interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry 19, 215–229 (1956)Google Scholar
  57. Ickes, W.: Empathic accuracy. Journal of Personality 61, 587–610 (1993)Google Scholar
  58. Jönsson, A., Dahlbäck, N.: Talking to a computer is not like talking to your best friend. In: Proceedings of the First Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Tromsø, Norway, March 9 -11 (1988)Google Scholar
  59. Jung, B., Kopp, S.: FlurMax: An Interactive Virtual Agent for Entertaining Visitors in a Hallway. In: Rist, T., Aylett, R.S., Ballin, D., Rickel, J. (eds.) IVA 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2792, pp. 23–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  60. Kaiser, S., Wehrle, T.: Animating and analyzing facial expressions in human-computer interactions: An appraisal based approach. Paper Presented at the ISRE General Meeting, Bari (July 2005)Google Scholar
  61. Kaiser, S., Wehrle, T., Schmidt, S.: Emotional episodes, facial expression, and re-ported feelings in human-computer interactions. In: Fischer, A.H. (ed.) Proceedings of the Xth Conference of the International Society for Research on Emotions, pp. 82–86. ISRE Publications, Würz-burg (1998)Google Scholar
  62. Kappas, A.: My happy vacuum cleaner. Paper Presented at the ISRE General Meeting, Symposium on Artificial Emotions, Bari (July 2005)Google Scholar
  63. Karttunen, L., Peters, S.: Conventional implicature of Montague grammar. In: Paper presented at the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA (1975)Google Scholar
  64. Kelly, H.H., Thibaut, J.: Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. Wiley, New York (1978)Google Scholar
  65. Kidd, C.D., Taggart, W., Turkle, S.: A sociable Robot to Encourage Social Interaction among the Elderly. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2006 , Orlando, Florida, May 15-19, pp. 3972–3976 (2006)Google Scholar
  66. Koay, K.L., Sydral, D.S., Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K.: Living with robots: Investigating the habituation effect in participants’ preferences during a longitudinal human-robot interaction study. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN 2007), pp. 564–569 (2007)Google Scholar
  67. Kohlberg, L.: Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In: Goslin, D.A. (ed.) Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research, pp. 347–480. Rand McNally, Chicago (1969)Google Scholar
  68. Kollack, P., Blumstein, P., Schwartz, P.: The judgement of equity in intimate relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly 57, 340–351 (1994)Google Scholar
  69. Kopp, S., Wachsmuth, I.: Synthesizing Multimodal Utterances for Conversational Agents. The Journal Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 15(1), 39–52 (2004)Google Scholar
  70. Kopp, S., Gesellensetter, L., Krämer, N.C., Wachsmuth, I.: A Conversational Agent as Museum Guide – Design and Evaluation of a Real-World Application. In: Panayiotopoulos, T., Gratch, J., Aylett, R.S., Ballin, D., Olivier, P., Rist, T., et al. (eds.) IVA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3661, pp. 329–343. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  71. Krämer, N.C.: Theory of Mind as a theoretical prerequisite to model communication with virtual humans. In: Wachsmuth, I., Knoblich, G. (eds.) Modeling Communication with Robots and Virtual Humans, pp. 222–240. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  72. Krämer, N.C.: Social Communicative Effects of a Virtual Program Guide. In: Panayiotopoulos, T., Gratch, J., Aylett, R.S., Ballin, D., Olivier, P., Rist, T., et al. (eds.) IVA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3661, pp. 442–453. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  73. Krämer, N.C., Bente, G.: Virtuelle Helfer: EmbodiedConversationalAgents in der Mensch-Computer-Interaktion. In: Bente, G., Krämer, N.C., Petersen, A. (eds.) Virtuelle Realitäten, pp. 203–225. Hogrefe, Göttingen (2002)Google Scholar
  74. Krämer, N.C., Nitschke, J.: Ausgabemodalitäten im Vergleich: Verändern sie das Eingabeverhalten der Benutzer? In: Marzi, R., Karavezyris, V., Erbe, H.-H., Timpe, K.-P. (eds.) Bedienen und Verstehen. 4. Berliner Werkstatt Mensch-Maschine-Systeme, pp. 231–248. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf (2002)Google Scholar
  75. Krämer, N.C., Bente, G., Piesk, J.: The ghost in the machine.The influence of Embodied Conversational Agents on user expectations and user behaviour in a TV/VCR application. In: Bieber&, G., Kirste, T. (eds.) IMC Workshop 2003, Assistance, Mobility, Applications, Rostock, pp. 21–128 (2003)Google Scholar
  76. Krämer, N., Eimler, S., von der Pütten, A., Payr, S.: Theory of companions” What can theoretical models contribute to applications and understanding of human-robot interaction?. Applied Artificial Intelligence (submitted)Google Scholar
  77. Krauss, R.M., Fussell, S.R.: Perspective taking in communication: Representation of others´ knowledge in reference. Social Cognition 9, 2–24 (1991)Google Scholar
  78. Laursen, B.: &Hartup, W. W. The origins of reciprocity and social exchange in friend-ships. In: Brett, L., Graziano, W.G. (eds.) Social Exchange in Development: New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, pp. 27–40. Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, San Francisco (2002)Google Scholar
  79. Le, B., Agnew, C.R.: Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta-analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships 10, 37–57 (2003)Google Scholar
  80. Lillard, A.: Ethnopsychologies: Cultural variations in theories of mind. Psychological Bulletin 123, 3–32 (1998)Google Scholar
  81. Matarić, M.J., Eriksson, J., Feil-Seifer, D., Winstein, C.J.: Socially assistive robotics for post-stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Neuro Engineering and Rehabilitation 4(5) (2007)Google Scholar
  82. Mead, G.H.: Mind, self, and society. Chicago University Press, Chicago (1934)Google Scholar
  83. Mills, J., Clark, M.S.: Communal and exchange relationships. In: Wheeler, L. (ed.) Review of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 121–144. Sage, Beverly Hills (1982)Google Scholar
  84. Mills, J., Clark, M.S.: Communal and exchange relationships: Controversies and re-search. In: Erber, R., Gilmour, R. (eds.) Theoretical Frameworks for Personal Relationships, pp. 29–42. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1994)Google Scholar
  85. Mills, J., Clark, M.S.: Viewing close romantic relationships as communal relationships: Implications for maintenance and enhancement. In: Harvey, J., Wenzel, A. (eds.) Close Romantic Relationships: Maintenance and Enhancement, pp. 12–25. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  86. Nakano, Y., Reinstein, G., Stocky, T., Cassell, J.: Towards a Model of Face-to-Face Grounding. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sapporo, Japan, July 7-12 (2003)Google Scholar
  87. Nass, C., Moon, Y.: Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues 56(1), 81–103 (2000)Google Scholar
  88. Nass, C., Steuer, J., Tauber, E.R.: Computers are social actors. In: Adelson, B., Du-mais, S., Olson, J. (eds.) Human Factors in Computing Systems: CHI 1994 Conference Proceedings, pp. 72–78. ACM Press, New York (1994)Google Scholar
  89. Nickerson, R.S.: How we know – and sometimes misjudge – what others know: Imput-ing one´s knowledge to others. Psychological Bulletin 125, 737–759 (1999)Google Scholar
  90. Norman, D.A.: The design of everyday things. Doubleday, New York (1988)Google Scholar
  91. O’Connor, S.C., Rosenblood, L.K.: Affiliation motivation in everyday experience: A theoretical comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70, 513–522 (1996)Google Scholar
  92. Oviatt, S.L., Adams, B.: Designing and evaluating conversational interfaces with animated characters. In: Cassell, J., Sullivan, J., Prevost, S., Churchill, E. (eds.) Embodied Conversational Agents, pp. 319–345. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  93. Oviatt, S., Darves, C., Coulston, R.: Toward adaptive conversational interfaces: Modeling speech convergence with animated personas. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human-Interaction 11(3), 300–328 (2004)Google Scholar
  94. Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., Waters, K.: Cooperating with life-like interface agents. Computers in Human Behavior 15, 123–142 (1999)Google Scholar
  95. Perner, J.: Simulation as explicitation of predication-implicit knowledge about the mind: arguments for a simulation-theory mix. In: Carruthers, P., Smith, P.K. (eds.) Theories of Mind, pp. 90–104. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  96. Piaget, J.: The language and thought of the child. Harcourt, New York (1921)Google Scholar
  97. Premack, D., Premack, A.J.: Origins of human social competence. In: Gazzaniga, M.S. (ed.) The Cognitive Neurosciences, pp. 205–218. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  98. Premack, D., Woodruff, G.: Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4, 512–526 (1978)Google Scholar
  99. Rickenberg, R., Reeves, B.: The effects of animated characters on anxiety, task performance, and evaluations of user interfaces. In: Letters of CHI 2000, pp. 49–56 (April 2000)Google Scholar
  100. Rist, T., Baldes, S., Gebhard, P., Kipp, M., Klesen, M., Rist, P., Schmitt, M.: CrossTalk: An interactive installation with animated presentation agents. In: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Computational Semiotics for Games and New Media (COSIGN 2002), Augsburg (2002)Google Scholar
  101. Rommeveit, R.: On message structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. Wiley, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  102. Ross, M., Holmberg, D.: Recounting the past: Gender differences in the recall of events in the history of a close relationship. In: Olson, J.M., Zanna, M.P. (eds.) Self-Inferences Processes: The Ontario Symposium, pp. 135–152. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1988)Google Scholar
  103. Ross, L., Greene, D., House, P.: The false consensus phenomenon: An attributional bias in self-perception and social perception processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13, 279–301 (1977)Google Scholar
  104. Rusbult, C.E.: A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and dete-rioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 45, 101–117 (1983)Google Scholar
  105. Rusbult, C.E., Martz, J.M., Agnew, C.R.: The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships 5, 357–391 (1998)Google Scholar
  106. Schermerhorn, P., Scheutz, M., Crowell, C.: Robot Social Presence and Gender: Do Females View Robots Differently than Males? In: The Proceedings of the 2008 Human-Robot Interaction Conference, Amsterdam, Netherlands (March 2008)Google Scholar
  107. Shantz, C.U.: Social cognition. In: Mussen, P. (ed.) Handbook of Child Psychology, vol. 3, pp. 495–555. Wiley, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  108. Smith, J.: GrandChair: Conversational collection of family stories. Media Lab. In: Sperber, D. (ed.) Paper Presented at Conference on Darwin and the Human Sciences, London School of Economics, MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  109. Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Blackwell, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  110. Sproull, L., Subramani, M., Kiesler, S., Walker, J.H., Waters, K.: When the interface is a face. Human Computer Interaction 11(2), 97–124 (1996)Google Scholar
  111. Stalnaker, R.C.: Assertion. In: Cole, P. (ed.) Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, pp. 315–332. Academic Press, New York (1978)Google Scholar
  112. Sundar, S.S., Nass, C.: Source orientation in human-computer interaction: programmer, networker, or independent social actor? Communication Research 27(6), 683–703 (2000)Google Scholar
  113. Swinth, K.R.: &Blascovich, J, Conformity to group norms in an immersive virtual envi-ronment. In: Hot Topic Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Society (APS), Toronto, Ontario (2001)Google Scholar
  114. Syrdal, D.S., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K.: A personalised robot companion? - The role of individual differences on spatial preferences in HRI scenarios. In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN 2007), pp. 26–29 (2007)Google Scholar
  115. Thibaut, J.W., Kelley, H.H.: The social psychology of groups. Wiley, New York (1959)Google Scholar
  116. Toby, J., Cosmides, L.: Foreword. In: Baron-Cohen, S. (ed.) Mindblindness. An essay on autism and theory of mind. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)Google Scholar
  117. Tversky, A., Kahnemann, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Sciences 185, 1124–1131 (1974)Google Scholar
  118. Vaananen, A., Buunk, B.P., Kivimaki, M., Pentti, J., Vahteva, J.: When is it better to give than to receive: Long-term health effects of perceived reciprocity in support exchange. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 89, 176–193 (2005)Google Scholar
  119. Wada, K., Shibata, T., Saito, T., Sakamoto, K., Tanie, K.: Psychological and social ef-fects of one year robot assisted activity on elderly people at a health service facility for the aged. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2005), Barcelona, Spain, pp. 2785–2790 (2005)Google Scholar
  120. Wada, K., Shibata, T.: Robot therapy in a care house - Its sociopsychological and physiological effects on the residents. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006 (ICRA 2006), Orlando, FL, pp. 3966–3971 (2006)Google Scholar
  121. Wada, K., Shibata, T.: Living with seal robots - Its sociopsychological and physiological influences on the elderly at a care house. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 23(5), 972–980 (2007)Google Scholar
  122. Walster, E., Walster, G.W., Berscheid, E.: Equity: Theory and research. In: Watson, O.M., Graves, T.D. (eds.) Quantitative Research in Proxemicbehavior. American Anthropologist, vol. 68, pp. 971–985. Allyn& Bacon, Needham Heights (1978)Google Scholar
  123. Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J.H., Jackson, D.D.: Pragmatics of human communication. In: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. W. W. Norton & Co., New York (1967)Google Scholar
  124. Wellman, H.M.: The child´s theory of mind. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  125. Whiten, A.: Natural theories of mind: Evolution, development and simulation of everyday mindreading. Basil Blackwell, Oxford (1991)Google Scholar
  126. Woods, S.N., Dautenhahn, K., Kaouri, C.: Is Someone Watching Me? Consideration of Social Facilitation Effects in Human-Robot Interaction Experiments. In: Proceedings of 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation (CIRA 2005), Espoo, Finnland, June 27 – 30, pp. 53–60 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole C. Krämer
    • 1
  • Astrid von der Pütten
    • 1
  • Sabrina Eimler
    • 1
  1. 1.University Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations