Advertisement

Exploring Children’s Attitudes towards Static and Moving Humanoid Robots

  • Fang-Wu Tung
  • Tsen-Yao Chang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8006)

Abstract

This study investigates the uncanny valley for robots designed specifically for child users, and examines their attitudes toward humanoid robots with different anthropomorphic appearances and behaviors. An uncanny valley was identified in this study, indicating that the children were less attracted to images they considered highly human-like, although they were distinguishable from humans. The results of this study support Mori’s uncanny valley hypothesis regarding children’s perceptions of static robots. A significant finding is that moving robots can moderate an uncanny valley plot, which contradicts Mori’s uncanny valley theory that the movement of a robot amplifies a generated emotional response. The moving robots exhibited various behaviors, such as facial expressions, speech, gazing, and gestures, which can generally enhance children’s perceptions of robots. These behaviors were derived from human-human interactions, and can be considered social cues. The results of this study show that social cues can be applied to child-robot interactions. Children perceive robots are more socially and physically attractive when they exhibit sufficient social cues. Specifically, the display of social cues by robots that are less anthropomorphic can significantly enhance children’s social perceptions of them. This has crucial implications for the behavior a child anticipates from a machine-like robot compared to a human-like robot. According to the study results, robots designed for children do not require excessively human-like designs. Middle- to low-level anthropomorphic designs combined with appropriate social cues can enhance children preferences and acceptance of robots. This also enables businesses to develop educational, care, or entertainment robots for children at a reasonable cost.

Keywords

humanoid robot child-robot interaction behavior social cue 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Prats, M., Sanz, P.J., del Pobil, A.P., Martínez, E., Marín, R.: Towards multipurpose autonomous manipulation with the UJI service robot. Robotica 25, 245–256 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartneck, C., Forlizzi, J.: A design-centred framework for social human–robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 13th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 591–594. IEEE Press, Kurashiki (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kiesler, S., Hinds, P.: Introduction to This Special Issue on Human-Robot Interaction. Human- Computer Interaction 19, 1–8 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thrun, S., Beetz, M., Bennewitz, M., Burgard, W., Cremers, A.B., Dellaert, F.: Probablistic algorithms and the interactive museum tour-guide robot minerva. Journal of Robotics Research 19, 972–1000 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Falcone, E., Gockley, R., Porter, E., Nourbakhsh, I.: The personal rover project: the comprehensive design of a domestic personal robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 42, 245–258 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kahn Jr., P.H., Friedman, B., Perez-Granados, D.R., Freier, N.G.: Robotic pets in the lives of preschool children. In: Poster presented at the 70th Anniversary of the Society for Research in Child Development-2003 Biennial Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dutenhahn, K., Woods, S., Kaouri, C., Walters, M., Koay, K.L., Werry, I.: What is a robot companion–friend, assistant, or butler? In: IEEE/Robotics Society of Japan International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman, B., Kahn Jr., P.H., Hagman, J.: Hardware companions? - What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship. In: Cockton, G., Korhonen, P. (eds.) Proceedings of CHI 2003 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 273–280. ACM Press, NY (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goetz, J., Kiesler, S., Powers, A.: Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lisbon, Portugal (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Scopelliti, M., Giuliani, M.V., D’Amico, A.M., Fornara, F.: If i had a robot at home Peoples’representation of domestic robots. In: Keates, S., Clarkson, J., Langdon, P., Robinson, P. (eds.) Designing a More Inclusive World, pp. 257–266. Springer, Cambridge (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mori, M.: The uncanny valley. Energy 7(4), 33–35 (1970)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McCroskey, J.C., McCain, T.A.: The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech Monographs 41, 261–266 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moon, Y.: Similarity effects in human-computer interaction: Effects of user personality, computer personality, and user control on attraction and attributions of responsibility, Unpublished doctorial dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford (1996)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, K.M., Peng, W., Yan, C., Jin, S.: Can Robots Manifest Personality? An Empirical Test of Personality Recognition, Social Responses, and Social Presence in Human-Robot Interaction. Journal of Communication 56, 754–772 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nunnally, J.C.: Psychometric Theory. McGraw Hill, New York (1967)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Hagita, N.: Is the Uncanny Valley an Uncanny Cliff? In: Proceedings of the 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 368–373. IEEE Press, NJ (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woods, S.: Exploring the Design Space of Robots: Children’s Perspectives. Interacting with Computers 18, 1390–1418 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Blow, M., Dautenhaun, K., Appleby, A., Nehaniv, C.L., Lee, D.: The art of designing robot faces: Dimensions for human-robot interaction. In: Proceedings of HRI 2006, pp. 331–332. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nass, C., Steuer, J.: Anthropomorphism, Agency, and Ethopoeia: Computers as Social Actors. Human Communication Research 19(4), 504–527 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: Media equation: how people treat computer, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mayer, R.E., Sobko, K., Mautone, P.D.: Social cues in multimedia learning: role of speaker’s voice. J. Educ. Psychol. 95, 419–425 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Piaget, J.: The child’s conception of the world. Littlefield Adams, Savage (1929)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fang-Wu Tung
    • 1
  • Tsen-Yao Chang
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Commercial DesignNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Creative DesignNational Yunlin University of Science and TechnologyYunlin CountyTaiwan

Personalised recommendations