Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reactive Chameleon: A Method to Mimic Conversation Partner’s Body Sway for a Robot

  • Original research
  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Along with improvements in information processing capabilities and development of machine learning, research that robots provide services instead of people is progressing. In order to raise satisfaction with the service provided by the robot, it is important to build a robot that makes it easy for people to talk and can get a good impression from people. In human–human interaction, mimicking the conversation partner’s motion is one of the factors that influence the impression from the conversation partner. The influence coming from the mimicking in the interaction is called the “chameleon effect”. As the chameleon effect, it is known that a person unconsciously mimics interaction partner’s nonverbal behavior, in addition, it is also known that a good impression can be obtained from the interaction partner by consciously mimicking the partner’s nonverbal behavior without being noticed. Previous studies have shown that the chameleon effect occurs also even in human–robot interaction by mimicking interaction partner’s nonverbal behavior, and interaction partner has good impression on the robot. However, considering the conversation scene, there are problems with the method verified in the previous research when robots mimic interaction partner’s nonverbal behavior. The first problem is that the robot cannot perform gestures using its arms and head at the same time as mimicking nonverbal behavior during conversation. The second problem is that the conversation partner may notice that the robot mimics his/her nonverbal behavior during the conversation. In this thesis, we propose “Reactive Chameleon”, a method to generate body sway for a robot that based mimicking a conversation partner’s body sway. Reactive Chameleon designed for a robot to get a good impression from the conversation partner by chameleon effect without disturbing robot gestures. In Reactive Chameleon, the volume of the mimicking is dynamically adjusted to the conversation partner and the adjusted robot’s sway merged with robot’s own body sway for the conversation partner not to notice that robot mimics his/her body sway. We conducted an experiment to verify that the impression that the participant has toward the robot is affected by having a conversation with a robot that mimics a participant’s body sway. Results of the experiment show that the robot that imitates body sway with Reactive Chameleon got high evaluation from the conversation partner by chameleon effect.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: https://www.ald.softbankrobotics.com/ja (Last accessed: 2018/2/2).

Fig. 4

Source: http://fileadmin.cs.lth.se/robot/nao/doc/family/juliette_technical/motors_juliette.html (Last accessed: 2018/2/2).

Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.nttdata.com/jp/ja/news/release/2015/111301.html.

  2. https://www.softbank.jp/robot/biz/case/.

  3. Source: https://www.xbox.com/ja-JP/xbox-one/accessories/kinect (Last accessed: 2018/2/2).

References

  1. Bailenson JN, Yee N, Patel K, Beall AC (2005) Detecting digital chameleons. Comput Hum Behav 24:66–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bailenson JN, Yee N (2005) Digital chameleons: automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychol Sci 16(10):814–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartneck C, Croft E, Kulic D (2008) Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots. Metrics for HRI workshop, Technical report, vol 471, pp 37–44

  4. Brščić D, Ikeda T, Kanda T (2017) Do you need help? A robot providing information to people who behave atypically. IEEE Trans Robot 33(2):500–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cappella JN, Planalp S (1981) Talk and silence sequences in informal conversations III: interspeaker influence. Hum Commun Res 7(2):117–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chartrand TL, Lakin JL (2013) The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annu Rev Psychol 64:285–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chartrand TL, Bargh JA (1999) The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. J Pers Soc Psychol 76(6):893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fuente LA, Ierardi H, Pilling M, Crook NT (2015) Influence of upper body pose mirroring in human–robot interaction. In: International conference on social robotics. Springer, pp 214–223

  9. Hale J, Hamilton AFDC (2016) Testing the relationship between mimicry, trust and rapport in virtual reality conversations. Sci Rep 6:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hsee CK, Hatfield E, Carlson JG, Chemtob C (1990) The effect of power on susceptibility to emotional contagion. Cogn Emot 4(4):327–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kanda T, Ishiguro H, Ishida T (2001) Psychological analysis on human–robot interaction. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2001. Proceedings 2001 ICRA, vol 4. IEEE, pp 4166–4173

  12. Kanoh M, Yukio Oida Y, Nomura AA, Konagaya Y, Ihara K, Shimizu T, Kimura K (2011) Examination of practicability of communication robot-assisted activity program for elderly people. J Robot Mechatron 23(1):3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kimoto M, Iio T, Shiomi M, Tanev I, Shimohara K, Hagita N (2017) Gender effects on lexical alignment in human-robot interaction. EEJ Trans Electron Info Syst 137(12):1625–1632

    Google Scholar 

  14. LaFrance M, Broadbent M (1976) Group rapport: posture sharing as a nonverbal indicator. Group Organ Stud 1(3):328–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lakin JL, Jefferis VE, Cheng CM, Chartrand TL (2003) The chameleon effect as social glue: evidence for the evolutionary significance of nonconscious mimicry. J Nonverb Behav 27(3):145–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maddux WW, Mullen E, Galinsky AD (2008) Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. J Exp Soc Psychol 44:461468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mehrabian A (1968) Inference of attitudes from the posture, orientation, and distance of a communicator. J Consult Clin Psychol 32(3):296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Michalowski MP, Simmons R, Kozima H (2009) Rhythmic attention in child–robot dance play. In: The 18th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication, 2009. RO-MAN 2009. IEEE, pp 816–821

  19. Neumann R, Strack F (2000) “Mood contagion”: the automatic transfer of mood between persons. J Pers Soc Psychol 79(2):211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Niwa S, Maruno S (2010) Development of a scale to assess the depth of self-disclosure. Jpn J Pers 18(3):196–209

    Google Scholar 

  21. Okazaki S, Hirotani M, Koike T, Bosch-Bayard J, Takahashi HK, Hashiguchi M, Sadato N (2015) Unintentional interpersonal synchronization represented as a reciprocal visuo-postural feedback system: a multivariate autoregressive modeling approach. PloS One 10(9):e0137126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Salem M, Eyssel F, Rohlfing K, Kopp S, Joublin F (2013) To err is human (-like): effects of robot gesture on perceived anthropomorphism and likability. Int J Soc Robot 5(3):313–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shimada M, Yamauchi K, Minato T, Ishiguro H, Itakura S (2008) Studying the influence of the chameleon effect on humans using an android. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, 2008. IROS 2008. IEEE, pp. 767–772

  24. Stevens CJ et al (2016) Mimicry and expressiveness of an ECA in human–agent interaction: familiarity breeds content!. Comput Cogn Sci 2(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tatsukawa K, Nakano T, Ishiguro H, Yoshikawa Y (2016) Eyeblink synchrony in multimodal human–android interaction. Sci Rep 6:39718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Van Baaren RB, Holland RW, Kawakami K, Van Knippenberg A (2004) Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychol Sci 15(1):71–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by JSPS (or MEXT) KAKENHI Grant Number 1 6 H 0 2 8 8 4. The authors have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this journal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Keio University, Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa-ken, 223-8522, Japan

    Ryosuke Hasumoto & Michita Imai

  2. Honda Research Institute Japan Co., Ltd., Honcho, Wako-shi, Saitama, 351-0188, Japan

    Kazuhiro Nakadai

Authors
  1. Ryosuke Hasumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kazuhiro Nakadai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michita Imai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryosuke Hasumoto.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hasumoto, R., Nakadai, K. & Imai, M. Reactive Chameleon: A Method to Mimic Conversation Partner’s Body Sway for a Robot. Int J of Soc Robotics 12, 239–258 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00557-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00557-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation