Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Human Robot Interaction

  • Reference work entry
Book cover Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 3,499.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

Anthropomorphic:

Resembling, or having the attributes, human form. Human qualities have been ascribed to inanimate objects, computer‐animated characters, and mechanical objects, among others. When referring to a robot, anthropomorphism refers to how human-like that robot is.

AR:

Assistive Robotics refers to robot systems that are designed to give aid or support to a human user. Traditionally, the assistance has been physical. However, AR has more recently expanded to encompass other types of assistance, including social, motivational, and cognitive. AR thus includes socially assistive robotics (defined below), rehabilitation robots, wheelchair robots and other mobility aids, companion robots, and educational robots.

Autonomy:

The ability to exert independent control, to self‐direct. When referring to robotics, autonomy is used to indicate how much control of a robot results from the robot itself (based on its sensory inputs and internal computation), and how much is exerted by a human operator through tele‐operation (defined below).

Benchmarks:

A standard used to measure performance. In the robotics context, benchmarks can be practical, relating to the safety and task performance of a system, or more abstract, relating to the ethical and other aspects of the system.

Embodied:

Having physical form, a body. Robots are inherently embodied, having physical form and existing in the physical world. In contrast, computer characters may or may not be embodied. Some animated characters have three‐dimensional bodies with simulated physics, thereby satisfying the condition of being embodied, but not being in the physical world.

GSR:

Galvanic Skin Response. Measure of electrodermal activity (EDA), or skin conductance, a function of the eccrine gland. GSR has been shown to be related to emotional stimuli, making it a potential sensor for determining user state.

HCI:

Human–Computer Interaction. HCI is the study of interaction between humans and computers. HCI includes interface design, issues with usability, ethics, interaction, and hardware and software design.

HRI:

Human–Robot Interaction. HRI is the study of interaction dynamics between humans and robots. In contrast to HCI, which addresses human‐computer interaction, HRI addresses the dynamics of interaction between humans and physical, embodied robots.

SAR:

Socially Assistive Robotics is the study of robots capable of providing assistance through social rather than physical interaction. SAR is the intersection of SIR (defined below) and AR (defined above). SAR work is focused on addressing societal needs, such as eldercare, education, and cognitive, physical, and social therapy.

SIR:

Socially Interactive Robotics describes robots that interact with humans through social interaction rather than through tele‐operation. SIR is a subset of HRI that addresses the challenges of social interaction between humans and robots. SIR can also be referred to as social robotics.

Robot:

A mechanical system that takes inputs from sensors, processes them, and acts on its environment to perform tasks.

Tele‐Operation:

The act of controlling a device (such as a robot) remotely. The use of tele‐operation for a robot decreases the autonomy of that robot.

Bibliography

  1. Aaronson NK, Acquadro C, Alonso J, Apolone G, Bucquet D, Bullinger M, Bungay K,Fukuhara S, Gandek B, Keller S, Razavi D, Sanson-Fisher R, Sullivan M, Wood-Dauphinee S, Wagner A Jr JEW (2004) International quality of life assessment(iqola) project. Qual Life Res 1(5):349–351

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aigner P, McCarragher B (1999) Shared control framework applied to a robotic aidfor the blind. Control Syst Mag IEEE 19(2):40–46

    Google Scholar 

  3. Asimov I (1950) I, robot. Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Asimov I (1976) Bicentennial man. Ballantine Books, NewYork

    Google Scholar 

  5. Asoh H, Hayamizu S, Hara I, Motomura Y, Akaho S, Matsui T (1997) Sociallyembedded learning of the office-conversant mobile robot jijo-2. In: International joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI), Nagoya,Japan

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baillie L, Pucher M, Képesi M (2004) A supportive multimodal mobile robot forthe home. In: Stary C, Stephanidis C (eds) User-centered interaction paradigms for universal access in the information society, Lecture notes in computerscience, vol 3196/2004. Springer, Berlin, pp 375–383

    Google Scholar 

  7. Baker M, Yanco H (2005) Automated street crossing for assistive robots. In:Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago, Il, pp 187– 192

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baltus G, Fox D, Gemperle F, Goetz J, Hirsh T, Magaritis D, Montemerlo M, PineauJ, Roy N, Schulte J, Thrun S (2000) Towards personal service robots for the elderly. In: Proceedings of the workshop on interactive robots andentertainment, Pittsburgh, PA

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bartneck C, Reichenbach J, v Breemen A (2004) In your face, robot! theinfluence of a character's embodiment on how users perceive its emotional expressions. In: Proceedings of the design and emotion 2004 conference, Ankara,Turkey

    Google Scholar 

  10. Betke M, Mullally W, Magee J (2000) Active detection of eye scleras in realtime. In: Proceedings of the IEEE workshop on human modeling, analysis and synthesis, Hilton Head, South Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bien Z, Park K, Bang W, Stefanov D (2002) LARES: An Intelligent Sweet Home forAssisting the Elderly and the Handicapped. In: Proceedings of the 1st Cambridge workshop on universal access and assistive technology (CWUAAT), Cambridge,UK, pp 43–46

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bradski G et al (1998) Computer vision faxce tracking for use in a perceptual user interface. Intel Technol J 2(2):12–21

    Google Scholar 

  13. Breazeal C (2000) Infant-like social interactions between a robot and a humancaretaker. Adapt Behav 8(1):49–74

    Google Scholar 

  14. Breazeal C, Edsinger A, Fitzpatrick P, Scassellati B (2001) Active vision forsociable robots. IEEE Transactions on Man, Cybern Syst 31(5)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Breazeal C, Hoffman G, Lockerd A (2004) Teaching and working with robots as a collaboration. In: Proceedings of the international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, vol 3. New York, pp1030–1037

    Google Scholar 

  16. Burgar C, Lum P, Shor P, van der Loos H (2002) Development of robots forrehabilitation therapy: The palo alto va/standford experience. J Rehabil Res Dev 37(6):663–673

    Google Scholar 

  17. Busso C, Deng Z, Yildirim S, Bulut M, Lee C, Kazemzadeh A, Lee S, Neumann U,Narayanan S (2004) Analysis of emotion recognition using facial expressions, speech and multimodal information. In: Proceedings of the internationalconference on multimodal interfaces, State Park, PA, pp 205–211

    Google Scholar 

  18. Capek K (2001) Rossum's universal robots. Dover Publications, NewYork

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cassell J, Sullivan J, Prevost S, Churchill E (2000) Embodied conversationalagents. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cowie R, Douglas-Cowie E, Tsapatsoulis N, Votsis G, Kollias S, Fellenz W,Taylor JG (2001) Emotion recognition in human–computer interaction. IEEE Signal Process Mag 18(1):32–80

    ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cowley S, Kanda H (2005) Friendly machines: Interaction-oriented robots todayand tomorrow. Altern 12(1a):79–106

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dautenhahn K, Werry I (2002) A quantitative technique for analysingrobot-human interactions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ, international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp1132–1138

    Google Scholar 

  23. Dick P (1968) Do androids dream of electric sheep. Doubleday, NewYork

    Google Scholar 

  24. DiSalvo C, Gemperle F, Forlizzi J, Kiesler S (2002) All robots are not createdequal: Design and the perception of humanoid robot heads. In: Proceedings of the conference on designing interactive systems: processes, practices,methods, and techniques, London, England, pp 321–326

    Google Scholar 

  25. Drumwright E, Jenkins OC, Matarić MJ (2004) Exemplar-based primitives forhumanoid movement classification and control. In: IEEE International conference on robotics and automation, pp 140–145

    Google Scholar 

  26. Drumwright E, Ng-Thow-Hing V, Matarić MJ (2006) Toward a vocabulary ofprimitive task programs for humanoid robots. In: International conference on development and learning, Bloomington, IN

    Google Scholar 

  27. Dubowsky S, Genot F, Godding S, Kozono H, Skwersky A, Yu H, Yu LS (2000)PAMM – a robotic aid to the elderly for mobility assistance and monitoring. In: IEEE International conference on robotics and automation, vol 1. San Francisco, CA, pp 570–576

    Google Scholar 

  28. Duffy B (2003) Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robot Autonom Syst42(3):177–190

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Duquette A, Mercier H, Michaud F (2006) Investigating the use of a mobilerobotic toy as an imitation agent for children with autism. In: Proceedingsof the international conference on epigenetic robotics: modeling cognitivedevelopment in robotic systems, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  30. Edwards N, Beck A (2002) Animal-assisted therapy and nutrition in Alzheimer'sdisease. West J Nurs Res 24(6):697–712

    Google Scholar 

  31. Engelberger JF (1989) Robotics in service. MIT Press,Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  32. Eriksson J, Matarić MJ, Winstein C (2005) Hands-off assistive robotics forpost-stroke arm rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago, Il, pp 21–24

    Google Scholar 

  33. Feil-Seifer D, Matarić MJ (2005) Defining socially assistive robotics. In:Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago, Il, pp 465–468

    Google Scholar 

  34. Feil-Seifer DJ, Skinner KM, Matarić MJ (2007) Benchmarks for evaluatingsocially assistive robotics. Interact Stud: Psychol Benchmarks Human–Robot Interact 8(3):423–439

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fong T, Nourbakhsh I, Dautenhahn K (2003) A survey of socially interactiverobots. Robot Autonom Syst 42(3-4):143–166

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Forlizzi J, DiSalvo C (2006) Service robots in the domestic environment: Astudy of the Roomba vacuum in the home. In: Proceeding of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on human–robot interaction. Academic, New York, pp258–265

    Google Scholar 

  37. Forlizzi J, DiSalvo C, Gemperle F (2004) Assistive robotics and an ecology ofelders living independently in their homes. Human–Comp Interact 19(1,2):25–59

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fortescue E, Kaushal R, Landrigan C, McKenna K, Clapp M, Federico F, GoldmannD, Bates D (2003) Prioritizing strategies for preventing medication errors and adverse drug events in pediatric inpatients. Pediatr111(4):722–729

    Google Scholar 

  39. Giminez A, Balaguer C, Sabatini SM, Genovese V (2003) The MATS roboticsystem to assist disabled people in their home environments. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent robots and systems,vol 3. Las Vegas, Nevada, pp 2612–2617

    Google Scholar 

  40. Glover J, Holstius D, Manojlovich M, Montgomery K, Powers A, Wu J, Kiesler S,Matthews J, Thrun S (2003) A robotically-augmented walker for older adults. Tech. Rep. CMU-CS-03-170, Carnegie Mellon University, Computer ScienceDepartment, Pittsburgh, PA

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gold K, Scassellati B (2005) Learning about the self and others throughcontingency. In: AAAI spring symposium on developmental robotics, Stanford, CA

    Google Scholar 

  42. Graf B, Hans M, Kubacki J, Schraft R (2002) Robotic home assistant care-o-botII. In: Proceedings of the joint EMBS/BMES conference, vol 3. Houston, TX, pp 2343–2344

    Google Scholar 

  43. Green A, Huttenrauch H, Norman M, Oestreicher L, Eklundh K (2000) Usercentered design for intelligent service robots. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, Osaka, Japan,pp 161–166

    Google Scholar 

  44. Grollman D, Jenkins O (2007) Learning elements of robot soccer fromdemonstration. In: Proceedings of the international conference on development and learning (ICDL), London, England

    Google Scholar 

  45. Grynszpan O, Martin J, Nadel J (2007) Exploring the influence of taskassignment and output modalities on computerized training for autism. Interact Stud 8(2):241–266

    Google Scholar 

  46. Harnad S (1989) Minds, machines and searle. J Exp Theor Artif Intell1:5–25

    Google Scholar 

  47. Harwin W, Ginige A, Jackson R (1988) A robot workstation for use in educationof the physically handicapped. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 35(2):127–131

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hobson RS (2000) The changing face of classroom instructional methods:servicelearning and design in a robotics course. In: Frontiers in education conference, vol 2. Kansas City, MO, pp F3C20–25

    Google Scholar 

  49. Horvitz E, Paek T (2001) Harnessing models of users' goals to mediateclarification dialog in spoken language systems. In: Proceedings of the eighth international conference on usermodeling, pp 3–13

    Google Scholar 

  50. Hsiu T, Richards S, Bhave A, Perez-Bergquist A, Nourbakhsh I (2003) Designinga low-cost, expressive educational robot. In: Proceedings of the conference on intelligent robots and systems, vol 3, pp2404–2409

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hunke M, Waibel A (1994) Face locating and tracking for human–computerinteraction. In: Conference record of the conference on signals, systems and computers, Pacific Grove, CA, vol 2, pp1277–1281

    Google Scholar 

  52. Jung J, Do J, Kim Y, Suh K, Kim D, Bien Z (2005) Advanced robotic residencefor the elderly/the handicapped : Realization and user evaluation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago,Il, pp 492–495

    Google Scholar 

  53. Kahn L, Verbuch M, Rymer Z, Reinkensmeyer D (2001) Comparison ofrobot-assisted reaching to free reaching in promoting recovery from chronic stroke. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitationrobotics. IOS Press, Evry, France, pp 39–44

    Google Scholar 

  54. Kahn PH, Ishiguro H, Friedman B, Kanda T (2006) What is a human? –Toward psychological benchmarks in the field of human–robot interaction. In: IEEE Proceedings of the international workshop on robot and humaninteractive communication (RO-MAN), Hatfield, UK

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kanda T, Hirano T, Eaton D, Ishiguro H (2003) Person identification andinteraction of social robots by using wireless tags. In: IEEE/RSJ International conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS2003), Las Vegas, NV, pp1657–1664

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kang K, Freedman S, Matarić MJ, Cunningham M, Lopez B (2005) Hands-offphysical therapy assistance robot for cardiac patients. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Chicago, Il, pp337–340

    Google Scholar 

  57. Kapoor A, Picard RW (2005) Multimodal affect recognition in learningenvironments. In: Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM international conference on Multimedia, Singapore, pp 677–682

    Google Scholar 

  58. Karna-Lin E, Pihlainen-Bednarik K, Sutinen E, Virnes M (2006) Can robotsteach? preliminary results on educational robotics in special education. In: Proceedings of the sixth IEEE international conference on advanced learningtechnologies (ICALT), pp 319–321

    Google Scholar 

  59. Kawamura K, Bagchi S, Iskarous M, Bishay M (1995) Intelligent robotic systemsin service of the disabled. Proc IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 3(1):14–21

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kidd CD, Breazeal C (2004) Effect of a robot on user perceptions. In: IEEE/RSJInternational conference on intelligent robots and systems, Sendai, Japan, pp 3559–3564

    Google Scholar 

  61. Kiesler S, Goetz J (2002) Mental models and cooperation with roboticassistants. In: Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, pp576–577

    Google Scholar 

  62. Kim K, Bang S, Kim S (2004) Emotion recognition system using short-termmonitoring of physiological signals. Med Biol Eng Comput 42(3):419–427

    Google Scholar 

  63. Kim Y, Park K, Seo K, Kim C, Lee W,Song W, Do J, Lee J, Kim B, Kim J et al (2003) A report on questionnaire for developing IntelligentSweet Home for the disabled and the elderly in Korean living conditions. In: Proceedings of the ICORR (the eighthinternational conference on rehabilitation robotics)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kitwood T, Bredin K (1992) A new approach to the evaluation of dementia care.J Adv Health Nurs Care 1(5):41–60

    Google Scholar 

  65. Koegel L, Carter C, Koegel R (2003) Teaching children with autismself-initiations as a pivotal response. Top Lang Disord 23:134–145

    Google Scholar 

  66. Koenig N, Matarić MJ (2006) Behavior-based segmentation of demonstratedtask. In: International conference on development and learning, Bloomington, IN

    Google Scholar 

  67. Koenig N, Matarić MJ (2006) Behavior-based segmentation of demonstratedtask. In: International conference on development and learning, Bloomington, IN

    Google Scholar 

  68. Koenig N, Matarić MJ (2006) Demonstration-based behavior and tasklearning. In: Working notes, AAAI spring symposium to boldy go where no human–robot team has gone before, Stanford,California

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kopp S, Wachsmuth I (2002) Model-based animation of coverbal gesture. In:Proceedings of the computer animation, IEEE computer society, Washington, DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kozima H, Nakagawa C, Yasuda Y (2005) Interactive robots forcommunication-care: a case-study in autism therapy. In: IEEE International workshop on robot and human interactive communication (ROMAN), Nashville, TN,pp 341–346

    Google Scholar 

  71. Lang S, Kleinehagenbrock M, Hohenner S, Fritsch J, Fink GA, Sagerer G (2003)Providing the basis for human–robot-interaction: A multi-modal attention system for a mobile robot. In: Proceedings of the international conference onmultimodal interfaces. ACM, Vancouver, Canada, pp 28–35

    Google Scholar 

  72. Lathan C, Vice J, Tracey M, Plaisant C, Druin A, Edward K, Montemayor J (2001)Therapeutic play with a storytelling robot. In: Conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, pp27–28

    Google Scholar 

  73. Lathan C, Boser K, Safos C, Frentz C, Powers K (2007) Using cosmo's learningsystem (CLS) with children with autism. In: Proceedings of the international conference on technology-based learning with disabilities, Dayton, OH, pp37–47

    Google Scholar 

  74. Lee C, Narayanan S (2005) Towards detecting emotions in spoken dialogs. IEEETrans Speech Audio Process 13(2):293–302

    Google Scholar 

  75. Lee KM, Nass C (2003) Designing social presence of social actors in humancomputer interaction. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Ft. Lauderdale, Fl, vol 5, pp 289–296,http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=642662

  76. Lee N, Keating D (1994) Controllers for use by disabled people. Comput ControlEng J 5(3):121–124

    Google Scholar 

  77. Lord C, McGee J (eds) (2001) Educating children with autism. National AcademyPress, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  78. Mahoney R, van der Loos H, Lum P, Burgar C (2003) Robotic stroke therapyassistant. Robotica 21:33–44

    Google Scholar 

  79. Matarić MJ, Eriksson J, Feil-Seifer D, Winstein C (2007) Sociallyassistive robotics for post-stroke rehabilitation. J NeuroEng Rehabil 4(5)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Matarić MJ, Koenig N, Feil-Seifer DJ (2007) Materials for enablinghands-on robotics and stem education. In: AAAI Spring symposium on robots and robot venues: resources for AI education, Stanford,CA

    Google Scholar 

  81. Matarić MJ, Fasola J, Feil-Seifer DJ (2008) Robotics as a tool forimmersive, hands-on freshmen engineering instruction. In: American society for engineering education, Proceedings of the ASEE annual conference &exposition, Pittsburgh, PA

    Google Scholar 

  82. Michaud F, Clavet A (2001) Robotoy contest – designing mobile robotictoys for autistic children. In: Proceedings of the american society for engineering education (ASEE), Alberqueque, New Mexico,http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/michaud01robotoy.html

  83. Michaud F, Laplante JF, Larouche H, Duquette A, Caron S, Letourneau D, MassonP (2005) Autonomous spherical mobile robot for child-development studies. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 35(4):471–480

    Google Scholar 

  84. Mikolajczyk K, Schmid C, Zisserman A (2004) Human Detection Based on a Probabilistic Assembly of Robust Part Detectors. Computer Vision, ECCV 2004: Proceedings of the 8th European conference on computer vision, Prague, CzechRepublic, 11-14 May 2004

    Google Scholar 

  85. Miller N, Jenkins O, Kallman M, Matarić MJ (2004) Motion capture frominertial sensing for untethered humanoid teleoperation. In: Proceedings, IEEE-RAS International conference on humanoid robotics (Humanoids-2004), SantaMonica, CA

    Google Scholar 

  86. Mohan A, Picard R (2004) Health0: a new health and lifestyle managementparadigm. Stud Health Technol Inform 108:43–8

    Google Scholar 

  87. Montemerlo M, Prieau J, Thrun S, Varma V (2002) Experiences with a mobilerobotics guide for the elderly. In: Procedings of the AAAI national conference on artificial intelligence. Edmunton, Alberta, pp 587–592

    Google Scholar 

  88. Mori M (1970) Bukimi no tani (The uncanny valley). Energy7:33–35

    Google Scholar 

  89. Morris A, Donamukkala R, Kapuria A, Steinfeld A, Matthews J, Dunbar-Jacob J,Thrun S (2003) A robotic walker that provides guidance. In: Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. ICRA,Taipei, Taiwan, pp 25–30

    Google Scholar 

  90. Mower E, Feil-Seifer D, Matarić MJ, Narayanan S (2007) Investigatingimplicit cues for user state estimation in human robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the international conference on human–robot interaction(HRI)

    Google Scholar 

  91. MP Michalowski HK S Sabanovic (2007) A dancing robot for rhythmicsocial interaction. In: Proceedings of the conference on human–robot interaction (HRI), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  92. Mundy P, Card J, Fox N (2000) Fourteen-month cortical activity and differentinfant joint attention skills. Dev Psychobiol 36:325–338

    Google Scholar 

  93. Mutlu B, Krause A, Forlizzi J, Guestrin C, Hodgins J (2007) Robust, low-cost,non-intrusive recognition of seated postures. In: Proceedings of 20th ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, Newport,RI

    Google Scholar 

  94. Nagai Y, Hosoda K, Asada M (2003) How does an infant acquire the ability ofjoint attention?: A constructive approach. In: Proceedings of the third international workshop on epigenetic robotics: modeling cognitive development inrobotic systems, Boston, MA, pp 91–98

    Google Scholar 

  95. Nicolescu M, Matarić MJ (2003) Linking perception and action in a controlarchitecture for human–robot interaction. In: Hawaii international conference on system sciences, (HICSS-36), Hawaii, USA

    Google Scholar 

  96. Nicolescu M, Matarić MJ (2005) Task learning through imitation andhuman–robot interaction. In: Dautenhahn K, Nehaniv C (eds) Models and mechanisms of imitation and social learning in robots, humans and animals:behavioural, social and communicative dimensions. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  97. Nordin P (1997) An on-line method to evolve behavior and to control a miniature robot in real time with genetic programming. Adapt Behav 5(2):107–140

    Google Scholar 

  98. Oppliger D (2001) University-pre college interaction through FIRST roboticscompetition. Oslo, Norway, pp 11–16

    Google Scholar 

  99. Oztop E, Franklin DW, Chaminade T, Cheng G (2005) Human–humanoid interaction:Is a humanoid robot perceived as a human? Int J Human Robot 2(4):537–559

    Google Scholar 

  100. Parise S, Kiesler S, Sproull L, Waters K (1999) Cooperating with life-likeinterface agents. Comp Human Behav 15(2):123–142

    Google Scholar 

  101. Plaisant C, Druin A, Lathan C, Dakhane K, Edwards K, Vice J, Montemayor J(2000) A storytelling robot for pediatric rehabilitation. In: Proceedings of the fourth international ACM conference on assistive technologies, Arlington,VA, pp 50–55

    Google Scholar 

  102. Pomerleau D (1993) Knowledge-based training of artificial neural networksfor autonomous robot driving. In: Connell JH, Mahadevan S (eds) Robot Learning. Kluwer, Boston, pp 19–43

    Google Scholar 

  103. Powers A, Kiesler S (2006) The advisor robot: Tracing people's mental modelfrom a robot's physical attributes. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM conference on human–robot interaction. ACM Press, Salt Lake City, UT, pp218–225

    Google Scholar 

  104. Reeves B, Nass C (1996) The media equation: how people treat computers,television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  105. Rentschler A, Cooper R, Blasch B, Boninger M (2003) Intelligent walkers forthe elderly: Performance and safety testing of VA-PAMAID robotic walker. J Rehabil Res Dev 40(5):423–431

    Google Scholar 

  106. Rizzolatti G, Arbib M (1998) Language within our grasp. Trends Neurosci21(5):188–194

    Google Scholar 

  107. Robins B, Dautenhahn K, Boekhorst R, Billard A (2005) Robotic assistants intherapy and education of children with autism: can a small humanoid robot help encourage social interaction skills? Univers Access Inf Soc4(2):105–120

    Google Scholar 

  108. Robles EA, Sukumaran A, Rickertsen K, Nass C (2006) Being watched or beingspecial: how i learned to stop worrying and love being monitored, surveilled, and assessed. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI conference on human factorsin computing systems, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp 831–839

    Google Scholar 

  109. Sakagami Y, Watanabe R, Aoyama C, Matsunaga S, Higaki N, Fujimura K, Ltd H,Saitama J (2002) The intelligent ASIMO: system overview and integration. In: International conference on intelligent robots and system, 2002, EPFL,Switzerland, vol 3, pp 2478–2483

    Google Scholar 

  110. Scassellati B (2003) Investigating models of social development using a humanoid robot. Proc Int Joint Conf Neural Networks 4:2704– 2709

    Google Scholar 

  111. Scassellati B (2005) Quantitative metrics of social response for autismdiagnosis. In: IEEE International workshop on robots and human interactive communication (ROMAN), Nashville, TN, pp585–590

    Google Scholar 

  112. Scassellati B (2005) Using social robots to study abnormal socialdevelopment. In: Proceedings of the fifth international workshop on epigenetic robotics: modeling cognitive development in robotic systems, Nara, Japan,pp 11–14

    Google Scholar 

  113. Scholtz J (2002) Evaluation methods for human–system performance ofintelligent systems. In: Proceedings of the 2002 performance metrics for intelligent systems (PerMIS) workshop, Gaithersburg,MD

    Google Scholar 

  114. Shalom DB, Mostofsky SH, Hazlett RL, Goldberg MC, Landa RJ, Faran Y, McLeodDR, Hoehn-Saric R (2006) Normal physiological emotions but differences in expression of conscious feelings in children with high-functioningautism. J Autism Dev Disord 36(3):295–400

    Google Scholar 

  115. Shin J, Narayanan S, Gerber L, Kazemzadeh A, Byrd D (2002) Analysis of userbehavior under error conditions in spoken dialogs. In: Proceedings of ICSLP, Denver, CO

    Google Scholar 

  116. Shin MC, Chang KI, Tsap LV (2002) Does colorspace transformation make anydifference on skin detection? In: Proceedings of sixth IEEE workshop on applications of computer vision, 2002 (WACV 2002), pp 275–279,http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/542214.html

  117. Shneiderman B (1989) A nonanthropomorphic style guide: Overcoming thehumpty-dumpty syndrome. Comput Teacher 16(7):5

    Google Scholar 

  118. Simpson R, Levine S (1997) Development and evaulation of voice control for a smart wheelchair. In: Proceedings of the rehabilitation engineering society of North America annual conference, Pittsburgh, PA, pp417–419

    Google Scholar 

  119. Sintonen H (1994) The 15-d measure of health related quality of life:reliability, validity and sensitivity of its health state descriptive system. Working Paper 41, Center for Health Program Evaluation, WestHeidelberg, Victoria, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  120. Sklar E, Eguchi A, Johnson J (2003) RoboCupJunior: learning with educationalrobotics. Robocup 2002: Robot Soccer World Cup VI

    Google Scholar 

  121. Sowa T, Kopp S (2003) A cognitive model for the representation andprocessing of shape-related gestures. In: Schmalhofer F, Young R, Katz G (eds) Proceedings of the European cognitive science conference (EuroCogSci03),Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc, New Jersey, p 441

    Google Scholar 

  122. Stein C (2002) Botball: Autonomous students engineering autonomous robots.In: Proceedings of the ASEE conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  123. Stiehl WD, Lieberman J, Breazeal C, Basel L, Lalla L, Wolf M (2006) Thedesign of the huggable: A therapeutic robotic companion for relational, affective touch. In: Proceedings of the AAAI fall symposium on caring machines:AI in eldercare, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  124. Stone M, DeCarlo D (2003) Crafting the illusion of meaning: Template-basedspecification of embodied conversational behavior. In: Proceedings of the international conference on computer animation and social agents, pp11–16

    Google Scholar 

  125. Takeuchi Y, Katagriri Y, Nass CI, Fogg BJ (2000) Social response andcultural dependency in human–computer interaction. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2000 conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  126. Tapus A, Matarić MJ (2006) User personality matching with hands-offrobot for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on experimental robotics (ISER), Rio de Janeiro,Brazil

    Google Scholar 

  127. Tapus A, Fasola J, Matarić MJ (2008) Socially assistive robots forindividuals suffering from dementia. In: ACM/IEEE 3rd human–robot interaction international conference, workshop on robotic helpers: user interaction,interfaces and companions in assistive and therapy robotics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  128. Tartaro A, Cassell J (2006) Authorable virtual peers for autism spectrumdisorders. In: Combined workshop on language enabled educational technology and development and evaluation of robust dialog system,ECAI

    Google Scholar 

  129. Taub E, Uswatte G, King D, Morris D, Crago J, Chatterjee A (2006) Aplacebo-controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy for upper extremity after stroke. Stroke 37(4):1045–9

    Google Scholar 

  130. Thrun S, Bennewitz M, Burgard W, Cremers A, Dellaert F, Fox D, Hahnel D,Rosenberg C, Roy N, Schulte J, Schulz D (1999) MINERVA: A second-generation museum tour-guide robot. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conferenceon robotics and automation (ICRA '99), Detroit, Michigan

    Google Scholar 

  131. Topping M, Smith J (1999) The development of handy, a robotic system toassist the severly disabled. In: Proceedings of the international conference on rehabilitation robotics, Stanford, CA,http://rose.iinf.polsl.gliwice.pl/%7Ekwadrat/www.csun.edu/cod/conf2001/proceedings/0211topping.html

  132. Turing A (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind49:433–460

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  133. Turkle S (2005) Relational artifacts/children/elders: The complexities ofcybercompanions. In: Toward social mechanisms of android science: A CogSci 2005 workshop, Stresa, Italy, p 62–33

    Google Scholar 

  134. Uchibe E, Asada M, Hosoda K (1998) Cooperative behavior acquisition inmulti-mobile robots environment by reinforcement learning based on state vector estimation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on roboticsand automation, Leuven, Belgium, pp 1558–1563

    Google Scholar 

  135. Valin J, Michaud F, Rouat J, Letourneau D (2003) Robust sound sourcelocalization using a microphone array on a mobile robot. Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems,2003(IROS 2003), vol 2, pp 1228–1233

    Google Scholar 

  136. Wada K, Shibata T, Saito T, Tanie K (2002) Analysis of factors that bringmental effects to elderly people in robot assisted activity. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent robots and systems, Lausanne,Switzerland, vol 2, pp 1152–1157

    Google Scholar 

  137. Wada K, Shibata T, Saito T, Sakamoto K, Tanie K (2005) Psychological andsocial effects of one year robot assisted activity on elderly people at a health service facility for the aged. In: Proceedings of the IEEE internationalconference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 2785–2790

    Google Scholar 

  138. Wainer J, Feil-Seifer D, Shell D, Matarić MJ (2006) The role of physicalembodiment in human–robot interaction. In: IEEE Proceedings of the international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, Hatfield, UnitedKingdom, pp 117–122

    Google Scholar 

  139. Wainer J, Feil-Seifer D, Shell D, Matarić MJ (2007) Embodiment andhuman–robot interaction: A task-based perspective. In: Proceedings of the international conference on human–robot interaction

    Google Scholar 

  140. Wallach W, Allen C (2005) Android ethics: Bottom-up and top-down approachesfor modeling human moral faculties. In: Proceedings of the 2005 CogSci workshop: toward social mechanisms of android science, Stresa, Italy, pp149–159

    Google Scholar 

  141. Wang D, Narayanan S (2007) An acoustic measure for word prominence inspontaneous speech. IEEE Trans Speech Audio Lang Process 15(2):690–701

    Google Scholar 

  142. Weng J, McClelland J, Pentland A, Sporns O, Stockman I, Sur M, Thelen E(2001) Autonomous mental development by robots and animals. Science 291(5504):599–600

    Google Scholar 

  143. Werry I, Dautenhahn K, Ogden B, Harwin W (2001) Can social interactionskills be taught by a social agent? The role of a robotic mediator in autism therapy. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2117. Springer, Heidelberg,pp 57–74

    Google Scholar 

  144. Wolf S, Thompson P, Morris D, Rose D, Winstein C, Taub E, Giuliani C,Pearson S (2005) The EXCITE trial: Attributes of the wolf motor function test in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair19:194–205

    Google Scholar 

  145. Wood-Dauphinee S (1999) Assessing quality of life in clinical research: Fromwhere have we come and where are we going? J Clin Epidemiol 52(4):355–363

    Google Scholar 

  146. Woods S, Walters M, Koay KL, Dautenhahn K (2006) Comparing human robotinteraction scenarios using live and video based methods: towards a novel methodological approach. In: Proceedings the 9th international workshop onadvanced motion control, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  147. Yanco H (2002) Evaluating the performance of assistive robotic systems. In:Proceedings of the workshop on performance metrics for intelligent systems, Gaithersburg, MD

    Google Scholar 

  148. Younger D, Martin G (2000) Dementia care mapping: an approach to qualityaudit of services for people with dementia in two health districts. J Adv Nurs 32(5):1206–1212

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

    David Feil-Seifer

  2. USC Center for Robotics and Embedded Systems, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA

    Maja J. Matarić

Authors
  1. David Feil-Seifer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maja J. Matarić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. RAMTECH LIMITED, 122 Escalle Lane, Larkspur, CA, 94939, USA

    Robert A. Meyers Ph. D. (Editor-in-Chief) (Editor-in-Chief)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag

About this entry

Cite this entry

Feil-Seifer, D., Matarić, M.J. (2009). Human Robot Interaction . In: Meyers, R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30440-3_274

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation