Colleen M. Carpinella
ABSTRACT
Accurately measuring perceptions of robots has become increasingly important as technological progress permits more frequent and extensive interaction between people and robots. Across four studies, we develop and validate a scale to measure social perception of robots. Drawing from the Godspeed Scale and from the psychological literature on social perception, we develop an 18-item scale (The Robotic Social Attribute Scale; RoSAS) to measure people's judgments of the social attributes of robots. Factor analyses reveal three underlying scale dimensions-warmth, competence, and discomfort. We then validate the RoSAS and show that the discomfort dimension does not reflect a concern with unfamiliarity. Using images of robots that systematically vary in their machineness and gender-typicality, we show that the application of these social attributes to robots varies based on their appearance.
- Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77--83.Google Scholar
- Willis, J., & Todorov, A. (2006). First impressions making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592--598.Google Scholar
- Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878--902.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ho, C. C., & MacDorman, K. F. (2010). Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1508--1518. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carpenter, J., Davis, J. M., Erwin-Stewart, N., Lee, T. R., Bransford, J. D., & Vye, N. (2009). Gender representation and humanoid robots designed for domestic use. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(3), 261--265.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eyssel, F., Kuchenbrandt, D. (2012). Social categorization of social robots: Anthropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4), 724--73Google ScholarCross Ref
- Eyssel, F., & Hegel, F. (2012). (S)he's Got the Look: Gender Stereotyping of Robots. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(9), 2213--2230Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Green, N. (1997). Are Machines Gender Neutral? Gender-Stereotypic Responses to Computers with Voices. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(10), 864--876.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81--103.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864--886.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kuchenbrandt, D., Eyssel, F., Bobinger, S., & Neufeld, M. (2013). When a robot's group membership matters. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5(3), 409--417.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71--81.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Foster, M. E., Gaschler, A., Giuliani, M., Isard, A., Pateraki, M., & Petrick, R. (2012). Two people walk into a bar: Dynamic multi-party social interaction with a robot agent. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (pp. 3--10). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2009, September). My robotic doppelgänger-A critical look at the uncanny valley. In RO-MAN 2009-The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 269--276).Google Scholar
- Lee, K. M., Park, N., & Song, H. (2005). Can a robot be perceived as a developing creature? Human Communication Research, 31 (4), 538--563.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Mubin, O., & Al Mahmud, A. (2007, November). The perception of animacy and intelligence based on a robot's embodiment. In 2007 7th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (pp. 300--305).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Warner, R. M., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). Attributions of personality based on physical appearance, speech, and handwriting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50 (4), 792--799.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Parise, S., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Waters, K. (1996, November). My partner is a real dog: cooperation with social agents. In Proceedings of the 1996 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (pp. 399--408). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kulic, D., & Croft, E. (2005, August). Anxiety detection during human-robot interaction. In 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 616--621).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Furr, M. (2011). Scale construction and psychometrics for social and personality psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
- Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 42, 155--162.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Blanz, V., & Vetter, T. (1999, July). A morphable model for the synthesis of 3D faces. In Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques? (pp. 187--194). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fitzmaurice, G. M., Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. Applied longitudinal analysis. 2004. Hoboken Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
- Fraune, M. R., Sherrin, S., Sabanović, S., & Smith, E. R. (2015, March). Rabble of robots effects: Number and type of robots modulates attitudes, emotions, and stereotypes. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 109--116). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Woods, S., Dautenhahn, K., & Schulz, J. (2004). The design space of robots: Investigating children's views. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop, 47--52.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kamide, H., Mae, Y., Kawabe, K., Shigemi, S., & Arai, T. (2012). A psychological scale for general impressions of humanoids. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 4030--4037).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kiesler, S., Powers, A., Fussell, S. R., & Torrey, C. (2008). Anthropomorphic interactions with a robot and robot-like agent. Social Cognition, 26(2), 169--181.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- The Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS): Development and Validation
Recommendations
Evaluating Social Perception of Human-to-Robot Handovers Using the Robot Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS)
HRI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot InteractionThis work explores social perceptions of robots within the domain of human-to-robot handovers. Using the Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS), we explore how users socially judge robot receivers as three factors are varied: initial position of the ...
Perceptions of ASIMO: an exploration on co-operation and competition with humans and humanoid robots
HRI '06: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interactionRecent developments in humanoid robotics have made possible a vision of robots in everyday use in the home and workplace. However, little is known about how we should design social interactions with humanoid robots. We explored how co-operation versus ...
Anthropomorphism and Human Likeness in the Design of Robots and Human-Robot Interaction
Social RoboticsAbstractIn this literature review we explain anthropomorphism and its role in the design of socially interactive robots and human-robot interaction. We illustrate the social phenomenon of anthropomorphism which describes people’s tendency to attribute ...
Comments