Abstract
Robots in human facing environments will move alongside human beings. This movement has both functional and expressive meaning and plays a crucial role in human perception of robots. Secondarily, how the robot is controlled – through methods like movement or programming and drivers like oneself or an algorithm – factors into human perceptions. This paper outlines the use of an embodied movement installation, “The Loop”, to understand perceptions generated between humans and various technological agents, including a NAO robot and a virtual avatar. Participants were questioned about their perceptions of control in the various agents. Initial results with human subjects demonstrate an increased likelihood to rate a robot and a robotic shadow as algorithmically controlled, versus a human performer and a human-shaped VR avatar which were more likely rated as human actor controlled or split between algorithm/human actor. Participants also showed a tendency to rate their own performance in the exercise as needing improvement. Qualitative data, collected in the form of text and drawings, was open-ended and abstract. Drawings of humans and geometric shapes frequently appeared, as did the words “mirror”, “movement”, and variations on the word “awareness”.
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
References
Abrahamson, D., et al.: You’re it! body, action, and object in STEM learning. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Future of learning (ICLS 2012), vol. 1, pp. 283–290 (2012)
Ashenfelter, K.T., Boker, S.M., Waddell, J.R., Vitanov, N.: Spatiotemporal symmetry and multifractal structure of head movements during dyadic conversation. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 35(4), 1072 (2009)
Bartneck, C., Nomura, T., Kanda, T., Suzuki, T., Kato, K.: Cultural differences in attitudes towards robots. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Robot Companions (SSAISB 2005 Convention), pp. 1–4 (2005)
Bartneck, C., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., Nomura, T.: The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots. Ai Soc. 21(1–2), 217–230 (2007)
Benenson, J.F., Apostoleris, N.H., Parnass, J.: Age and sex differences in dyadic and group interaction. Dev. Psychol. 33(3), 538 (1997)
Bessiere, K., Ceaparu, I., Lazar, J., Robinson, J., Shneiderman, B.: Social and psychological influences on computer user frustration. In: Media Access: Social and Psychological Dimensions of New Technology Use, pp. 169–192 (2004)
Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Emotion and motivation. In: Handbook of Psychophysiology, 2nd edn, pp. 602–642 (2000)
Burgoon, J.K., Stern, L.A., Dillman, L.: Interpersonal Adaptation: Dyadic Interaction Patterns. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)
Cantú, N.E.: La quinceañera: towards an ethnographic analysis of a life-cycle ritual. South. Folk. 56(1), 73 (1999)
Cuan, C., Pakrasi, I., LaViers, A.: Time to compile: an interactive art installation. In: 16th Biennial Symposium on Arts & Technology, vol. 51, p. 19 (2018)
Du, G., Zhang, P., Mai, J., Li, Z.: Markerless kinect-based hand tracking for robot teleoperation. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 9(2), 36 (2012)
Gelin, R., et al.: Towards a storytelling humanoid robot. In: AAAI Fall Symposium: Dialog with Robots, Arlington (2010)
Grammer, K., Kruck, K.B., Magnusson, M.S.: The courtship dance: patterns of nonverbal synchronization in opposite-sex encounters. J. Nonverbal Behav. 22(1), 3–29 (1998)
Han, J., 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), pp. 679–683. IEEE (2012)
Hansen, S.L.: Dating choices of high school students. Fam. Coord. 26, 133–138 (1977)
Johnson-Glenberg, M.: Immersive VR and education: embodied design principles that include gesture and hand controls. Front. Robot. AI 5, 81 (2018)
Johnson-Glenberg, M.C., Megowan-Romanowicz, C.: Embodied science and mixed reality: how gesture and motion capture affect physics education. Cogn. Res.: Princ. Implic. 2(1), 24 (2017)
Johnson-Glenberg, M.C., Megowan-Romanowicz, C., Birchfield, D.A., Savio-Ramos, C.: Effects of embodied learning and digital platform on the retention of physics content: centripetal force. Front. Psychol. 7, 1819 (2016)
Jokinen, K., Wilcock, G.: Multimodal open-domain conversations with the Nao robot. In: Mariani, J., Rosset, S., Garnier-Rizet, M., Devillers, L. (eds.) Natural Interaction with Robots, Knowbots and Smartphones, pp. 213–224. Springer, New York (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8280-2_19
Kaeppler, A.L.: II. Dance ethnology and the anthropology of dance. Danc. Res. J. 32(1), 116–125 (2000)
Kendal, R.: Infographic: virtual reality stats everyone should see. Technical report, BOSS Magazine, 01 August 2018. https://thebossmagazine.com/virtual-reality-statistics-infographic/
Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., Felton, M.: Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentive reasoning. Cogn. Instr. 15(3), 287–315 (1997)
Laver, K.E., Lange, B., George, S., Deutsch, J.E., Saposnik, G., Crotty, M.: Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (11), Art. No.: CD008349 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub4
Lazar, J., Jones, A., Shneiderman, B.: Workplace user frustration with computers: an exploratory investigation of the causes and severity. Behav. Inf. Technol. 25(03), 239–251 (2006)
Lindgren, R., Tscholl, M.: Enacted misconceptions: using embodied interactive simulations to examine emerging understandings of science concepts. International Society of the Learning Sciences, Boulder, CO (2014)
Machida, E., Cao, M., Murao, T., Hashimoto, H.: Human motion tracking of mobile robot with Kinect 3D sensor. In: 2012 Proceedings of SICE Annual Conference (SICE), pp. 2207–2211. IEEE (2012)
McCarthy, J., Wright, P.: Technology as experience. Interactions 11(5), 42–43 (2004)
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E.T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Davis, T.J.: Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: a meta-analysis. Comput. Educ. 70, 29–40 (2014)
Morris, R., Wander, P.: Native American rhetoric: dancing in the shadows of the ghost dance. Q. J. Speech 76(2), 164–191 (1990)
Navarre, D.: Posture sharing in dyadic interaction. Am. J. Danc. Ther. 5(1), 28–42 (1982)
Noy, L., Dekel, E., Alon, U.: The mirror game as a paradigm for studying the dynamics of two people improvising motion together. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108(52), 20947–20952 (2011)
Qian, K., Niu, J., Yang, H.: Developing a gesture based remote human-robot interaction system using Kinect. Int. J. Smart Home 7(4), 203–208 (2013)
Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1997)
Rosen, E., et al.: Communicating robot arm motion intent through mixed reality head-mounted displays. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.03655 (2017)
Shamsuddin, S., et al.: Humanoid robot NAO: review of control and motion exploration. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Control System, Computing and Engineering (ICCSCE), pp. 511–516. IEEE (2011)
Shamsuddin, S., et al.: Initial response of autistic children in human-robot interaction therapy with humanoid robot NAO. In: 2012 IEEE 8th International Colloquium on Signal Processing and its Applications (CSPA), pp. 188–193. IEEE (2012)
Statista: Number of TV households worldwide from 2010 to 2021. Technical report, Statista, 01 January 2018. https://www.statista.com/statistics/268695/number-of-tv-households-worldwide/
Stern, D.N.: Mother and infant at play: the dyadic interaction involving facial, vocal, and gaze behaviors (1974)
Strickhouser, J.E., Zell, E.: Self-evaluative effects of dimensional and social comparison. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 59, 60–66 (2015)
Tesser, A.: Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. In: Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 21, pp. 181–227. Elsevier (1988)
Vinayagamoorthy, V., et al.: Building expression into virtual characters (2006)
Whitney, D., Rosen, E., Phillips, E., Konidaris, G., Tellex, S.: Comparing robot grasping teleoperation across desktop and virtual reality with ROS reality. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Robotics Research (2017)
Acknowledgement
This work was conducted under IRB #17427 and supported by a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant #1528036. The authors would like to thank the organizing committee of the 5th Annual Conference on Movement and Computing, which was the site of this experiment and provided production support. Novoneel Chakraborty contributed to the creation of the installation. The authors wish to thank Alexandra Bacula, Roshni Kaushik, and Cameron Scoggins for their assistance in running the experiment on site.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Cuan, C., Pakrasi, I., LaViers, A. (2018). Perception of Control in Artificial and Human Systems: A Study of Embodied Performance Interactions. In: Ge, S., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11357. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_49
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_49
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05203-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05204-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)