The Influence of Body Proportions on Perceived Gender of Robots in Latin America

  • Gabriele TrovatoEmail author
  • Cesar Lucho
  • Friederike Eyssel
  • Jasmin Bernotat
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10715)


Subtle aspects of a robot’s appearance may create biased expectations of the robot’s abilities, which may influence user acceptance. The present research investigated the perception of gender in robot design, focusing specifically on the proportion between chest, waist, and hips to indicate robot gender. We did so by conducting an online survey in Latin American context. The results highlight the importance of chest-to-hip ratio and waist-to-hip ratio in gender attribution and mind attribution to robots.


Robot design Humanoid robots Gender 


  1. 1.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergmann, K., Eyssel, F., Kopp, S.: A second chance to make a first impression? How appearance and nonverbal behavior affect perceived warmth and competence of virtual agents over time. In: Nakano, Y., Neff, M., Paiva, A., Walker, M. (eds.) IVA 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7502, pp. 126–138. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eyssel, F., Loughnan, S.: “It don’t matter if you’re black or white”? Effects of robot appearance and user prejudice on evaluations of a newly developed robot companion. In: Herrmann, G., Pearson, M.J., Lenz, A., Bremner, P., Spiers, A., Leonards, U. (eds.) ICSR 2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8239, pp. 422–431. Springer, Cham (2013). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eyssel, F., Kuchenbrandt, D., Hegel, F., de Ruiter, L.: Activating elicited agent knowledge: how robot and user features shape the perception of social robots. In: Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN 2012), pp. 851–857 (2012).
  5. 5.
    Kuchenbrandt, D., Häring, M., Eichberg, J., Eyssel, F., André, E.: Keep an eye on the task! Effects of task characteristics on human-robot interactions. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6, 417–427 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reich-Stiebert, N., Eyssel, F.: Robots in the classroom: what teachers think about teaching and learning with education robots. In: Agah, A., Cabibihan, J.-J., Howard, A.M., Salichs, M.A., He, H. (eds.) ICSR 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9979, pp. 671–680. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eyssel, F., Hegel, F.: (S)he’s got the look: gender-stereotyping of social robots. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 42, 2213–2230 (2012). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, S., Kiesler, S., Lau, I.Y., Chiu, C.: Human mental models of humanoid robots. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2005), Barcelona, 18–22 April, pp. 2767–2772 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Powers, A., Kramer, A.D.I., Lim, S., Kuo, J., Lee, S.-L., Kiesler, S.: Eliciting information from people with a gendered humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 158–163 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang, Y., Young, J.E.: Beyond “Pink” and “Blue”: gendered attitudes towards robots in society. In: Proceedings of Gender and IT Appropriation. Science and Practice on Dialogue - Forum for Interdisciplinary Exchange (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trovato, G., Lopez, A., Paredes, R., Cuellar, F.: Security and guidance: two roles for a humanoid robot in an interaction experiment. Presented at the 2016 IEEE RO-MAN, Lisbon, Portugal (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bernotat, J., Eyssel, F., Sachse, J.: Shape it – the influence of robot body shape on gender perception in robots. In: Kheddar, A., Yoshida, E., Ge, S.S., Suzuki, K., Cabibihan, J.-J., Eyssel, F., He, H. (eds.) Social Robotics, ICSR 2017. LNCS, vol. 10652, pp. 75–84. Springer, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dijkstra, P., Buunk, B.P.: Sex differences in the jealousy-evoking nature of a rival’s body build. Evol. Hum. Behav. 22(5), 335–341 (2001). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lidwell, W., Manacsa, G.: Deconstructing Product Design: Exploring the Form, Function, Usability, Sustainability, and Commercial Success of 100 Amazing Products. Rockport Publishers, Beverly (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goddard, A., Patterson, L.M.: Language and Gender. Psychology Press, London (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schott, G.D.: Sex symbols ancient and modern: their origins and iconography on the pedigree. BMJ 331(7531), 1509–1510 (2005). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh, D.: Female judgment of male attractiveness and desirability for relationships: role of waist-to-hip ratio and financial status. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69(6), 1089–1101 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Crilly, N., Moultrie, J., Clarkson, P.J.: Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Des. Stud. 25(6), 547–577 (2004). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Onchi, E., Lucho, C., Sigüenza, M., Trovato, G., Cuellar, F.: Erratum to: introducing IOmi - a female robot hostess for guidance in a university environment. In: Agah, A., Cabibihan, J.-J., Howard, A.M., Salichs, M.A., He, H. (eds.) ICSR 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9979, p. E1. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guizzo, E.: Meet Pepper, Aldebaran’s new personal robot with an “Emotion Engine”. IEEE Spectr. (2014). Last accessed 14 Aug 2015Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Blondet, C.: Out of the kitchens and onto the streets: women’s activism in Peru. In: Basu, A. (ed.) The Challenge of Local Feminisms: Women’s Movements in Global Perspective, pp. 251–75. Westview Press, Boulder (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mensa, M.: Creative women in Peru: outliers in a machismo world. Commun. Soc. 28(2), 1–18 (2015). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Glick, P., Fiske, S.T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J.L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., López López, W.: Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 79(5), 763–775 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dixson, B.J., Dixson, A.F., Li, B., Anderson, M.J.: Studies of human physique and sexual attractiveness: sexual preferences of men and women in China. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 19(1), 88–95 (2007). Scholar
  25. 25.
    van der Kooy, K., Leenen, R., Seidell, J.C., Deurenberg, P., Droop, A., Bakker, C.J.: Waist-hip ratio is a poor predictor of changes in visceral fat. Am. J. Clin. Nutrit. 57(3), 327–333 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lin, Y.-C., Wang, M.-J.J., Wang, E.M.: The comparisons of anthropometric characteristics among four peoples in East Asia. Appl. Ergon. 35, 173–178 (2004). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bem, S.L.: The measurement of psychological Androgyny. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 42(2), 155–162 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fernandez Sedano, I.: Actitudes, auto-conceptos, cultura y emoción: una investigación transcultural (Ph.D. thesis). UPV/EHU (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rollero, C., Glick, P., Tartaglia, S.: Psychometric properties of short versions of the ambivalent sexism inventory and ambivalence toward men inventory. TPM: Test. Psychometrics Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 21(2), 149–159 (2014)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Glick, P., Fiske, S.T.: The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 70(3), 491 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Expósito, F., Glick, P., Morales, M.C.M.: Sexismo ambivalente: medición y correlatos. Rev. Psicología Soc. 13(2), 159–169 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gabriele Trovato
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Cesar Lucho
    • 2
  • Friederike Eyssel
    • 3
  • Jasmin Bernotat
    • 3
  1. 1.Research Institute of Science and EngineeringWaseda UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Pontificia Universidad Católica del PerúLimaPeru
  3. 3.Bielefeld UniversityBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations