Drawing as the Relative Movement Between Subject and Medium: Using a Robot to Show the Subjectivity in Dynamic Flows of Consciousness

  • Miki Goan
  • Katsuyoshi Tsujita
  • Susumu Kihara
  • Kenjiro Okazaki
Part of the Mathematics for Industry book series (MFI, volume 14)


There are two kinds of consciousness which arise in the creative process of drawing. One is the consciousness that one is trying to draw a picture. The other is the consciousness that one is made to draw a picture while facing various material resistances. In this research, drawing experiments were conducted using a parallel link-type robot which played the role of medium, combining the two kinds of consciousness to show the subjectivity in dynamic flows of consciousness. The experimental system was as follows. Participant #1 draws a free line on a tablet computer. Participant #2 only holds the pen to a moving board on the robot. When the robot moves the drawing board under the pen, the line drawing is recreated on the board. The robot’s movements are inversely transformed by the participant’s. Results indicate that even if Participant #2 did not move their own hand, they recognize the picture drawn on the robot board as their own. Additionally, they could identify who drew the drawings on the tablet by using only haptic information from the robots movements.


Agency Medium Relative movement Touch Identification 



This work was partially supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) No. 26284035 from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). This study has received ethics clearance of Osaka Institute of Technology Life Science Ethics Committee (No. 2013-42).


  1. Turing, A.M.: Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59, 433–460 (1950)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Hofstadter, D.R.: GNodel, Escher, Bach: an Eternal Golden Braid. Basic Books, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  3. Libet, B., Wright Jr, E.W., Gleason, C.A.: Readiness-potentials preceding unrestricted espontaneous vs pre-planned voluntary acts. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 54(3), 322–335 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Miyake, Y.: Interpersonal synchronization of body motion and the Walk-Mate walking support robot. IEEE Trans. Robot. 25(3), 638–644 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Miyake, Y.: Co-creation system and human-computer interaction. In: Sakai, T., Tanaka, K., Rose, K., Kita, H., Jozen, T., Takada, H. (eds.) 3-rd Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing (C5 2005), pp. 169–172. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ikemoto, S., Minato, T., Ishiguro, H.: Analysis of physical human-robots interaction for motor learning with physical help. Appl. Bionics Biomechan. 5(4), 213–223 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. HAYABUSA—A Technology Demonstrator for Sample and Return. Mission pamphlet, JAXA (2010)Google Scholar
  8. Mars Science Laboratory/Curiosity. Fact sheet, NASA (2012)Google Scholar
  9. McLuhan, H.M.: Understanding Media: the Extensions of Man. McGraw-Hill, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  10. Merleau-Ponty, M.: PhLenomLenologie de la Perception. Gallimard, Paris (1945)Google Scholar
  11. Botvinick, M., Cohen, J.: Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391, 756 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Anani, A.B., Ikeda, K., Korner, L.M.: Human ability to discriminate various parameters in afferent electrical nerve stimulation with particular reference to prostheses sensory feedback. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 15, 363–373 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ramachandran, V.S., Blakeslee, S.: Phantoms in the Brain: Probing the Mysteries of the Human Mind. William Morrow and Co., New York (1998)Google Scholar
  14. Ehrsson, H.H., RosLen, B., Stockselius, A., RagnNo, C., KNohler, P., Lundborg, G.: Upper limb amputees can be induced to experience a rubber hand as their own. Brain 131(12), 3443–3452 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Marasco, P.D., Kim, K., Colgate, J.E., Peshkin, M.A., Kuiken, T.A.: Robotic touch shifts perception of embodiment to a prosthesis in targeted reinnervation amputees. Brain 134(3), 747–758 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kudoh, S., Ogawara, K., Komachiya, K., Ikeuchi, K.: Painting simulation using robots. In: Gart and Robotsh workshop of IEEE/RSJ 2008 International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Nice, France (2008)Google Scholar
  17. Aristotle: De Anima (On the soul). (350 BC), In: Nakahata, M., (Trans.) Kyoto University Press, Kyoto (2001)Google Scholar
  18. de Vignemont, F., Fourneret, P.: The sense of agency: a philosophical and empirical review of the gWhoh system. Conscious. Cogn. 13, 1–19 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaptelinin, V., Nardi, B.A.: Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  20. Aoyama, M.: Agency reexamined: how artifacts design human agency. Cogn. Stud. 19(2), 164–174 (2012). (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  21. Okazaki, K.: Robots create humans: The definition of robot through art, or the definition of human and art through robot. In: Gart and Robotsh workshop of IEEE/RSJ 2008 International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Nice, France (2008)Google Scholar
  22. Suchman, L.A.: Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  23. Goan, M., Tsujita, K., Kihara, S., Okazaki, K.: The generation of emotional transmission via medium-perceiving drawing system and the plasticity of subjects. In: Suzuki, Y., Hagiya, M. (eds.) Recent Advances in Natural Computing, Mathematics for Industry, vol. 9, pp. 99–112 (2014)Google Scholar
  24. Vlassova, A., Donkin, C., Pearson, J.: Unconscious information changes decision accuracy but not confidence. PNAS, Published online before print October 27, 2014. doi:10.1073/pnas.1403619111Google Scholar
  25. Tresset, P., Leymarie, F.F.: Portrait drawing by Paul the robot. Comput. Graph. 37(5), 348–363 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gibson, J.J.: The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1966)Google Scholar
  27. Iwamura, Y., Tanaka, M., Sakamoto, M., Hikosaka, O.: Vertical neuronal arrays in the postcentral gyrus signaling active touch: a receptive field study in the conscious monkey. Exp. Brain Res. 58(2), 412–420 (1985)Google Scholar
  28. Turvey, M.T.: Dynamic touch. Am. Psychol. 51(11), 1134–1152 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Katz, D., Krueger, L.E. (Trans.): The World of Touch. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1989)Google Scholar
  30. Shibata, T.: David Katz—The Uniqueness of His Theory of Medium: A Comparative Study with J.J. Gibsonfs Theory of Tool. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education, the University of Tokyo, vol. 43, pp. 279–286 (2003) (in Japanese)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miki Goan
    • 1
  • Katsuyoshi Tsujita
    • 2
  • Susumu Kihara
    • 1
  • Kenjiro Okazaki
    • 3
  1. 1.urizen/POST STUDIUMKokubunji-shi, TokyoJapan
  2. 2.Osaka Institute of TechnologyAsahi-ku, OsakaJapan
  3. 3.College Art and DesignMusashino Art UniversityKodaira-shi, TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations