Abstract
This study investigates the effects of culture, robot appearance and task on human-robot interaction. We propose a model with culture (Chinese, Korean and German), robot appearance (anthropomorphic, zoomorphic and machinelike) and task (teaching, guide, entertainment and security guard) as factors, and analyze these factors’ effects on the robot’s likeability, and people’s active response to, engagement with, trust in and satisfaction with the robot. We conducted a laboratory experiment with 108 participants to test the model and performed Repeated ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis Test on the data. The results show that cultural differences exist in participants’ perception of likeability, engagement, trust and satisfaction; a robot’s appearance affects its likeability, while the task affects participants’ active response and engagement. We found the participants expected the robot appearance to match its task only in the interview but not in the subjective ratings. Interaction between culture and task indicates that participants from low-context cultures may have significantly decreased engagement when the sociability of a task is lowered. We found strong and positive correlations between interaction performance (active response and engagement) and preference (likeability, trust and satisfaction) in the human-robot interaction.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
IFR Statistical Department (2009) Professional service robots are establishing themselves. In: World robotics 2009—service robots. IFR Statistical Department, Frankfurt
SuperDroid. Rp2w two way remote presence robot. Available from: http://www.robotshop.ca/superdroid-rp2w-remote-presence-robot.html
Sony. Aibo. Available from: http://support.sony-europe.com/aibo/index.asp
Takara. Tera bots. Available from: http://www.engadget.com/2005/01/20/takaras-new-tera-bots/
Aldebaran-Robotics. Nao. Available from: http://www.aldebaran-robotics.com/en/
Powers A, Kiesler S (2006) The advisor robot: tracing people’s mental model from a robot’s physical attributes. In: HRI’06, 2006
Kiesler S, Goetz J (2002) Mental models of robotic assistants. ACM, New York
Hofstede G (1980) Motivation, leadership, and organization: do american theories apply abroad? Organ Dyn 9(1):42–63
Hofstede G (1983) The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories. J Int Bus Stud 14(2):75–89
Hofstede G, Hofstede G (2005) Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. McGraw-Hill, London
Hofstede G Cultural dimensions. Available from: http://www.geert-hofstede.com
Hall E (1977) Beyond culture. Anchor, Garden City
O’Neill-Brown P (1997) Setting the stage for the culturally adaptive agent. In: 1997 AAAI fall symposium. AAAI Press, Menlo Park
Reinecke K, Bernstein A (2007) Culturally adaptive software: moving beyond internationalization. Lect Not Comput Sci 4560:201
Bartneck C et al (2005) A cross-cultural study on attitudes towards robots. In: The 11th international conference on human-computer interaction (HCI ’05). Las Vegas, USA
Bartneck C et al (2007) The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots. Artif Intell Soc 21:217–230
Bartneck C (2008) Who like androids more: japanese or U.S. americans? In: 17th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN’08)
Rau P, Li Y, Li D (2009) Effects of communication style and culture on ability to accept recommendations from robots. Comput Hum Behav 25(2): 587–595
Wang L et al (2010) When in Rome: the role of culture and context in adherence to robot recommendations. In: Proceeding of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. ACM, Osaka
Evers V et al (2008) Relational vs. group self-construal: untangling the role of national culture in HRI. In: 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference: human-robot interaction. ACM, Amsterdam
Fong T, Nourbakhsh I, Dautenhahn K (2003) A survey of socially interactive robots. Robot Auton Syst 42(3–4):143–166
Syrdal D et al (2007) Looking good? Appearance preferences and robot personality inferences at zero acquaintance. In: AAAI—spring symposium 2007, multidisciplinary collaboration for socially assistive robotics. AAAI Press, Menlo Park
Goetz J, Kiesler S, Powers A (2003) Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. In: IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN ’03)
Robins B et al (2004) Robots as assistive technology—does appearance matter? In: IEEE international workshop on robot and human communication (RO-MAN ’04)
Kiesler S, Goetz J (2002) Mental models of robotic assistants. In: CHI ’02 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Minneapolis
Woods S (2006) Exploring the design space of robots: children’s perspectives. Interac Comput 18(6):1390–1418
Mori M (1970) The uncanny valley. Energy 7(4):33–35
Gee F, Browne W, Kawamura K (2005) Uncanny valley revisited. In: 14th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN ’05). Nashville, USA
Walters M et al (2008) Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Auton Robots 24(2):159–178
Walters ML et al (2009) Preferences and perceptions of robot appearance and embodiment in human-robot interaction trials. In: Artificial intelligence and simulation of behaviour (AISB’09) convention. Edinburgh, Scotland
Lohse M, Hegel F, Wrede B (2008) Domestic applications for social robots-an online survey on the influence of appearance and capabilities. J Phys Agents 2(2):21
IFR Statistical Department (2009) Executive summary of world robotics 2009, IFR Statistical Department
Kumar V, Bekey G, Zheng Y (2006) Industrial, personal and service robots. In: Bekey G (ed) Assessment of international research and development in robotics. World Technology Evaluation Center, Lancaster
Onishi N In a wired South Korea, robots will feel right at home. In: The New York Times, April 2 (2006)
Lohse M et al (2007) What can I do for you? Appearance and application of robots. In: Artificial intelligence and simulation of behaviour (AISB ’07)
Montgomery D (1991) Design and analysis of experiments
Lombard M et al (2000) Measuring presence: a literature-based approach to the development of a standardized paper-and-pencil instrument. In: Third international workshop on presence. Citeseer, Delft
Reyen S (2005) Construction of a new scale: the Reysen likeability scale. Soc Behav Pers 33(2):201–208
Nicholson CY, Compeau LD, Sethi R (2001) The role of interpersonal liking in building trust in long-term channel relationships. Acad Mark Sci 29(1):3–15
Adams B et al (2003) Trust in automated systems. Ministry of National Defence
Chin J, Diehl V, Norman K (1988) Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. ACM, New York, pp 213–218
Hofstede G (1984) Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Britton C et al (2002) An empirical study of user preference and performance with UML diagrams. In: Proceedings of IEEE 2002 symposia on human centric computing languages and environments (HCC02). Arlington, Virginia
Bartneck C et al (2005) Cultural differences in attitudes towards robots. In: Robot companions: hard problems and open challenges in robot-human interaction (AISB ’05). University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, D., Rau, P.L.P. & Li, Y. A Cross-cultural Study: Effect of Robot Appearance and Task. Int J of Soc Robotics 2, 175–186 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0056-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0056-9