Social Robots as Persuasive Agents

  • Evgenios Vlachos
  • Henrik Schärfe
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8531)


The topic of human robot interaction (HRI) is an important part of human computer interaction (HCI). Robots are more and more used in a social context, and in this paper we try to formulate a research agenda concerning ethical issues around social HRI in order to be prepared for future scenarios where robots may be a naturally integrated part of human society. We outline different paradigms to describe the role of social robots in communication processes with humans, and connect HRI with the topic of persuasive technology in health care, to critically reflect the potential benefits of using social robots as persuasive agents. The ability of a robotic system to conform to the demands (behaviors, understanding, roles, and tasks) that arise from the place the robot is designed to perform, affect the user and his/er sense of place attachment. Places are constantly changing, and so do interactions, thus robotic systems should continually adjust to change by modifying their behavior accordingly.


human-robot interaction persuasive agent social robots ethics place attachment 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Veruggio, G., Operto, F.: Roboethics: a bottom-up interdisciplinary discourse in the field of applied ethics in robotics. International Review of Information Ethics 6, 2–8 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharkey, N., Sharkey, A.: The crying shame of robot nannies: an ethical appraisal. Interaction Studies 11(2), 161–190 (2010)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kanda, T., Nishio, S., Ishiguro, H., Hagita, N.: Interactive Humanoid Robots and Androids in Children’s Lives. Children, Youth and Environments 19(1), 12–33 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liu, C., Conn, K., Sarkar, N., Stone, W.: Online affect detection and robot behaviour adaptation for intervention of children with autism. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 24(4), 883–896 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Breazeal, C.: Social interactions in HRI: the robot view. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 34(2), 181–186 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vlachos, E., Schärfe, H.: The Geminoid Reality. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) HCII 2013, Part II. CCIS, vol. 374, pp. 621–625. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Paré, Z.: Robot Drama Research: From Identification to Synchronization. In: Ge, S.S., Khatib, O., Cabibihan, J.-J., Simmons, R., Williams, M.-A. (eds.) ICSR 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7621, pp. 308–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yamazaki, R., Nishio, S., Ogawa, K., Ishiguro, H.: Teleoperated android as an embodied communication medium: A case study with demented elderlies in a care facility. In: RO-MAN 2012, pp. 1066–1071 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wainer, J., Dautenhahn, K., Robins, B., Amirabdollahian, F.: Collaborating with Kaspar: Using an autonomous humanoid robot to foster cooperative dyadic play among children with autism. In: IEEE-RAS 2010 Inter. Con. on Humanoid Robots, pp. 631–638. IEEE Press (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wong, A., Tan, Y.K., Tay, A., Wong, A., Limbu, D.K., Dung, T.A., Chua, Y., Yow, A.P.: A User Trial Study to Understand Play Behaviors of Autistic Children Using a Social Robot. In: Ge, S.S., Khatib, O., Cabibihan, J.-J., Simmons, R., Williams, M.-A. (eds.) ICSR 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7621, pp. 76–85. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ranatunga, I., Rajruangrabin, J., Popa, D.O., Makedon, F.: Enhanced therapeutic interactivity using social robot Zeno. In: Proc. of the 4th International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments, pp. 57–62. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaplan, F.: Talking AIBO: First experimentation of verbal interactions with an autonomous four-legged robot. In: Learning to behave: interacting agents CELE-TWENTE Workshop on Language Technology, pp. 57–63 (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Breazeal, C.: Toward sociable robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 42(3), 167–175 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Calo, C.J., Hunt-Bull, N., Lewis, L., Metzler, T.: Ethical Implications of Using the Paro Robot. In: 2011 AAAI Workshop (WS-2011-2012), pp. 20–24 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rist, T., Wendzel, S., Masoodian, M., André, E.: Creating awareness for efficient energy use in smart homes. In: Intelligent Wohnen. Zusammenfassung der Beiträge zum Usability Day IX, pp. 162–168 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Libin, A., Cohen-Mansfield, J.: Therapeutic robocat for nursing home residents with dementia: preliminary inquiry.  American Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias 19(2), 111–116 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gupta, A.K., Arora, S.K.: Industrial automation and robotics. Laxmi Publications (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sundar, S.S., Nass, C.: Source Orientation in Human-Computer Interaction Programmer, Networker, or Independent Social Actor. Communication Research 27(6), 683–703 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The Media Equations: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places. CLSI Publications (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change what We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Gass, R.H., Seiter, J.S.: Persuasion, social influence, and compliance gaining, 2nd edn., p. 34. Allyn & Bacon/Longman, Boston (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Strommen, E.: When the interface is a talking dinosaur: learning across media with ActiMates Barney. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 288–295. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. (1998)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Harrison, S., Dourish, P.: Re-place-ing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems. In: Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 67–76. ACM, New York (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beaudouin-Lafon, M.: Designing Interaction, not Interfaces. In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 15–22. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kuzuoka, H., Yamazaki, K., Yamazaki, A., Kosaka, J., Suga, Y., Heath, C.: Dual Ecologies of Robot as Communication Media: Thoughts on Coordinating Orientations and Projectability. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2004), vol. 6(1), pp. 183–190 (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Epley, N., Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J.T.: On Seeing Human: A Three-Factor Theory of Anthropomorphism. Psychological Review 114(4), 864–886 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cresswell, T.: Place. Blackwell Pub. (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shumaker, S.A., Taylor, R.B.: Toward a clarification of people-place relationships: A model of attachment to place. In: Feimer, N.R., Geller, E.S. (eds.) Environmental Psychology: Directions and Perspectives, pp. 219–251. Praeger, New York (1983)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dautenhahn, K., Ogden, B., Quick, T.: From embodied to socially embedded agents–implications for interaction-aware robots. Cognitive Systems Research 3(3), 397–428 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sharkey, A., Sharkey, N.: Granny and the robots: ethical issues in robot care for the elderly. Ethics and Information Technology 14(1), 27–40 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Reason, J.T.: Human error. Cambridge University Press (1990)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evgenios Vlachos
    • 1
  • Henrik Schärfe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Communication and PsychologyAalborg UniversityDenmark

Personalised recommendations