Abstract
Hybrid collaboration between human and machine antagonists is currently discussed as the most likely scenario of future manufacturing within the next 10 years because it considers technological developments and preserves human workplaces at the same time. However, not only technical feasibility plays a role in the design of these future collaborations, but also the psychological and social effects must be considered. This paper analyzes the subjective stress level of humans in dependence of the characteristics of robots (2 × 2 design with either an industrial or a humanoid robot that was performing either reliable or faulty). A virtual experiment has been conducted to simulate a collaborative hybrid task, including a pre- and post-survey to test. Results do not show any effect of condition, but significant effects of time. The results suggest that the experiment has generally been perceived as slightly stressful, but the appearance and behavior of the robot has no effect on the subjective stress level.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The current year of 2017 cannot be evaluated because of the time of the evaluation, but the authors suspect a further increase in the number of publications.
- 2.
A Wizard-of-Oz experiment refers to an experimental setting in which the subject assumes he is communicating with an autonomous system (in the sense of artificial intelligence). In reality, however, the reactions of the system are generated by another person in secret [22].
References
Boakye-Adjei, K., Thamma, R., Kirby, E.D.: Autonomation: the future of manufacturing. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IAJC-ISAM International Conference, Orlando, Florida (2014). ISBN, 978‐1
Jahoda, M.: Work, employment, and unemployment. Values, theories, and approaches in social research. Am. Psychol. 36(2), 184–191 (1981). doi:10.1037/0003-066X.36.2.184
Goetsch, D.L. (ed.): Technical Drawing, 5th edn. Thomson Delmar Learning, Australia (2005)
Michalos, G., Makris, S., Spiliotopoulos, J., Misios, I., Tsarouchi, P., Chryssolouris, G.: ROBO-PARTNER: Seamless human-robot cooperation for intelligent, flexible and safe operations in the assembly factories of the future. Procedia CIRP 23, 71–76 (2014). doi:10.1016/j.procir.2014.10.079
Onnasch, L., Maier, X., Jürgensohn, T.: Mensch-Roboter-Interaktion - Eine Taxonomie für alle Anwendungsfälle, Dortmund (2016)
Schmidtler, J., Knott, V., Hölzel, C., Bengler, K., Schlick, C.M., Bützler, J.: Human centered assistance applications for the working environment of the future. OER 12, 83–95 (2015). doi:10.3233/OER-150226
Roschelle, J., Teasley, S.D.: The Construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In: O’Malley, C. (ed.) Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. NATO ASI Series, vol. 128, pp. 69–97. Springer, Heidelberg (1995). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1_5
Billard, A., Dautenhahn, K.: Grounding communication in situated, social robots. Manchester (1997)
Breazeal, C.: Designing Sociable Robots. Intelligent robots and autonomous agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, London (2002)
Ferrari, F., Eyssel, F.: Toward a hybrid society. In: Agah, A., Cabibihan, J.-J., Howard, A.M., Salichs, M.A., He, H. (eds.) ICSR 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9979, pp. 909–918. Springer, Cham (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_89
Charles, R.L., Charalambous, G., Fletcher, S.: Your new colleague is a robot. Is that ok? Proceedings of the International Conference on Ergonomics & Human Factors, pp. 307–311 (2015)
Plaumann, M., Busse, A., Walter, U.: Grundlagen zu Stress. In: KKH Kaufmännische Krankenkasse (ed.) Weißbuch Prävention 2005/2006, pp. 3–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Rensing, L., Koch, M., Rippe, B., Rippe, V. (eds.): Mensch im Stress: Psyche, Körper. Moleküle. Springer Spektrum, Berlin (2013)
Henry, J.P.: Biological basis of the stress response. Integr. Physiol. Behav. Sci. 27(1), 66–83 (1992). doi:10.1007/BF02691093
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., Zoghbi, S.: Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int. J. Soc. Robotics 1(1), 71–81 (2009). doi:10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
Guse, S., Wagner, E.: Die Bedeutung von individueller Resilienz in Veränderungsprozessen. Cooperative Change Group, München
Helton, W.S., Näswall, K.: Short stress state questionnaire. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 31(1), 20–30 (2015). doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000200
Mori, M.: Bukimi no tani. Energy 7(4), 33–35 (1970)
Mori, M., MacDorman, K., Kageki, N.: The Uncanny valley [From the Field]. IEEE Robot. Automat. Mag. 19(2), 98–100 (2012). doi:10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
Wickens, C.D., Sebok, A., Li, H., Sarter, N., Gacy, A.M.: Using Modeling and Simulation to Predict Operator Performance and Automation-Induced Complacency with Robotic Automation: A Case Study and Empirical Validation. Hum. Factors 57(6), 959–975 (2015). doi:10.1177/0018720814566454
Müller, S.L., Schröder, S., Jeschke, S., Richert, A.: Design of a robotic workmate. In: Duffy, V.G. (ed.) DHM 2017. LNCS, vol. 10286, pp. 447–456. Springer, Cham (2017). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-58463-8_37
Kennedy, R.S., Lane, N.E., Berbaum, K.S., Lilienthal, M.G.: Simulator sickness questionnaire. An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3(3), 203–220 (1993). doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
Vorderer, P., Wirth, W., Gouveia, F.R., Biocca, F., Saari, T., Jäncke, F., Böcking, S., Schramm, H., Gysbers, A., Hartmann, T., Klimmt, C., Laarni, J., Ravaja, N., Sacau, A., Baumgartner, T., Jäncke, P.: MEC Spatial Presence Questionnaire (MEC-SPQ): Short Documentation and Instructions for Application. Report to the European Community, Project Presence: MEC, Hannover, Zurich, Porto, Helsinki (2004). http://www.ijk.hmt-hannover.de/presence
Schuster, K.: Einfluss natürlicher Benutzerschnittstellen zur Steuerung des Sichtfeldes und der Fortbewegung auf Rezeptionsprozesse in virtuellen Lernumgebungen, 1st edn. Tectum, Marburg (2015)
Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., Dautenhahn, K.: Would you trust a (faulty) robot? Effects of error, task type and personality on human-robot cooperation and trust. In: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2015). doi:10.1145/2696454.2696497
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research within the project ELLI (Excellent Teaching and Learning in Engineering Sciences).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Müller, S.L., Stiehm, S., Jeschke, S., Richert, A. (2017). Subjective Stress in Hybrid Collaboration. In: Kheddar, A., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10652. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_59
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_59
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70021-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70022-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)