Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conversational Flow in Human-Robot Interactions at the Workplace: Comparing Humanoid and Android Robots

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Social Robotics (ICSR 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 12483))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This article deals with the conversational flow during human-robot interactions at the workplace. We conducted an experimental field study in a company setting. Drawing on computer-as-social-actor (CASA) paradigm, we argue that employees might mindlessly apply social rules in conversations with service robots which is reflected in the degree of conversational flow. We examined to which extent the structure of the Conversational Skills Rating Scale (CSRS) can be replicated with real-life human-robot interactions and whether there are differences in conversational flow between humanoid robots, android robots and humans. We could show that the conversational flow in such service settings at the workplace is based on the factors expressiveness, coordination and composure. The results show that android robots can evoke a higher level of expressiveness in employees than humanoid robots. To our knowledge, our study is the first to compare different aspects of conversational flow towards service robots in a real workplace setting. Since conversational flow can create social bonds and satisfy social needs, companies should use this knowledge when considering using robots in customer or employee contact.

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 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

References

  1. Koudenburg, N., Postmes, T., Gordijn, E.H.: Conversational flow and entitativity: the role of status. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 53, 350–366 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Koudenburg, N., Postmes, T., Gordijn, E.H.: Conversational flow promotes solidarity. PLoS ONE 8, 1–6 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Han, J.G., Campbell, N., Jokinen, K., Wilcock, G.: Investigating the use of non-verbal cues in human-robot interaction with a NAO robot. In: 2012 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications (CogInfoCom) (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Koudenburg, N., Postmes, T., Gordijn, E.H.: Disrupting the flow: how brief silences in group conversations affect social needs. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 47, 512–515 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Wirtz, J., et al.: Brave new world: service robots in the frontline. J. Serv. Manag. 29, 907–931 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Huang, M.-H., Rust, R.T.: Technology-driven service strategy. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 45, 906–924 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Mende, M., Scott, M.L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., Shanks, I.: Service robots rising: how humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. J. Mark. Res. 56, 535–556 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. van Doorn, J., et al.: Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto: emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines and customers’ service experiences. J. Serv. Res. 20, 43–58 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Arimoto, T., Yoshikawa, Y., Ishiguro, H.: Multiple-robot conversational patterns for concealing incoherent responses. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 10, 583–593 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hill, J., Randolph Ford, W., Farreras, I.G.: Real conversations with artificial intelligence: a comparison between human–human online conversations and human–chatbot conversations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 49, 245–250 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Spitzberg, B.H.: Conversational skills rating scale: an instructional assessment of interpersonal competence (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harriott, C.E., Zhang, T., Adams, J.A.: Evaluating the applicability of current models of workload to peer-based human-robot teams. In: 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 45–52 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lu, V.N., et al.: Service robots, customers, and service employees: what can we learn from the academic literature and where are the gaps? J. Serv. Theory Pract. (2020, forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Phillips, E., Zhao, X., Ullman, D., Malle, B.F.: What is human-like?: decomposing robots’ human-like appearance using the Anthropomorphic roBOT (ABOT) database. In: HRI 2018, Chicago, IL, USA, 5–8 March 2018, pp. 105–113 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ferrari, F., Paladino, M.P., Jetten, J.: Blurring human-machine distinctions: anthropomorphic appearance in social robots as a threat to human distinctiveness. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 8, 287–302 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mori, M., MacDorman, K., Kageki, N.: The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 19, 98–100 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. MacDorman, K.F., Ishiguro, H.: The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research. Interact. Stud. 7, 297–337 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Minato, T., Shimada, M., Itakura, S., Lee, K., Ishiguro, H.: Evaluating the human likeness of an Android by comparing gaze behaviors elicited by the android and a person. Adv. Robot. 20, 1147–1163 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Haring, K.S., Silvera-Tawil, D., Takahashi, T., Watanabe, K., Velonaki, M.: How people perceive different robot types: a direct comparison of an android, humanoid, and non-biomimetic robot. In: 8th International Conference on Knowledge and Smart Technology (KST), pp. 265–270. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Matsui, T., Yamada, S.: Robot’s impression of appearance and their trustworthy and emotion richness. In: Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Nanjing, China, 27–31 August 2018, pp. 88–93 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nass, C., Moon, Y.: Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. J. Soc. Issues 56, 81–103 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim, Y., Sundar, S.S.: Anthropomorphism of computers: is it mindful or mindless? Comput. Hum. Behav. 28, 241–250 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B.J., Reeves, B., Dryer, D.C.: Can computer personalities be human personalities? Int. J. Hum.-Comput Stud. 43, 223–239 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Złotowski, J., Proudfoot, D., Yogeeswaran, K., Bartneck, C.: Anthropomorphism: opportunities and challenges in human-robot interaction. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7, 347–360 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Natarajan, M., Gombolay, M.: Effects of anthropomorphism and accountability on trust in human robot interaction. In: HRI 2020, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 23–26 March 2020, pp. 33–42 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Reeves, B., Nass, C.: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places, pp. 19–36. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wagner, K., Schramm-Klein, H.: Alexa, are you human? Investigating the anthropomorphism of digital voice assistants – a qualitative approach. In: Fortieth International Conference on Information Systems, Munich (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kwon, M., Jung, M.F., Knepper, R.A.: Human expectations of social robots. In: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 463–464 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Aguinis, H., Bradley, K.J.: Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Org. Res. Methods 17, 351–371 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kaiser, H.F., Rice, J.: Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educ. Psychol. Measur. 34, 111–117 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Browne, M.W., Cudeck, R.: Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociol. Methods Res. 21, 230–258 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hu, L.-T., Bentler, P.M.: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model.: Multidisc. J. 6, 1–55 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H.: Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol. Res. Online 8, 23–74 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gliem, J.A., Gliem, R.R.: Calculating, interpreting, and reporting cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for likert-type scales. In: 2003 Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, pp. 82–88 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Moosbrugger, H., Kelava, A.: Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20072-4

    Book  Google Scholar 

  37. Homburg, C., Giering, A.: Konzeptualisierung und Oparationalisierung komplexer Konstrukte. Mark. ZFP J. Res. Manag. 18, 3–24 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Churchill Jr., G.A.: A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J. Mark. Res. 16, 64–73 (1979)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technical University of Darmstadt, Hochschulstraße 1, 64289, Darmstadt, Germany

    Ruth Stock-Homburg, Martin Hannig & Lucie Lilienthal

Authors
  1. Ruth Stock-Homburg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Hannig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucie Lilienthal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Hannig .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

    Alan R. Wagner

  2. University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV, USA

    David Feil-Seifer

  3. University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

    Kerstin S. Haring

  4. University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy

    Silvia Rossi

  5. Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USA

    Thomas Williams

  6. Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, USA

    Hongsheng He

  7. National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

    Shuzhi Sam Ge

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Stock-Homburg, R., Hannig, M., Lilienthal, L. (2020). Conversational Flow in Human-Robot Interactions at the Workplace: Comparing Humanoid and Android Robots. In: Wagner, A.R., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12483. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_48

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_48

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62055-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62056-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation