Skip to main content

To Beep or Not to Beep Is Not the Whole Question

  • Conference paper
Social Robotics (ICSR 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 8755))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this paper, we address social effects of different mechanisms by means of which a robot can signal a person that it wants to pass. In the situation investigated, the robot attempts to pass by a busy, naïve participant who is blocking the way for the robot. The robot is a relatively large service robot, the Care-o-bot. Since speech melody has been found to fulfill social functions in human interactions, we investigate whether there is a difference in perceived politeness of the robot if the robot uses a beep sequence with rising versus with falling intonation, in comparison with no acoustic signal at all. The results of the experimental study (n=49) shows that approaching the person with a beep makes people more comfortable than without any sound, and that rising intonation contours make people feel more at ease than falling contours, especially women, who rate the robot that uses rising intonation contours as friendlier and warmer. The exact form of robot output thus matters.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brown, P., Levinson, S.: Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge University Press (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fischer, K., Soto, B., Pontafaru, C., Takayama, L.: The Effects of Social Framing on People’s Responses to Robots’ Requests for Help. In: Ro-man 2014, Edinburgh (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Graf, B., Reiser, U., Hägele, M., Mauz, K., Klein, P.: Robotic home assistant Care-O-bot3 - product vision and innovation platform. In: IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (ARSO), pp. 139–144 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Groom, V., Takayama, L., Ochi, P., Nass, C.: I am my robot: the impact of robot-building and robot form on operators. In: HRI 2009 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hoque, M.M., Das, D., Onuki, T., Kobyashi, Y., Kuno, Y.: Model for Controlling a Target Human’s Attention in Multi-Party Settings. In: Ro-man 2012, Paris, France, pp. 476–483 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hüttenrauch, H., Severinson-Eklundh, K.: To Help or Not to Help a Service Robot. In: Ro-man 2003, Millbrae, CA, pp. 379–384 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kendon, A.: Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters. Cambridge University Press (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kriz, S., Anderson, G., Trafton, J.G.: Robot-directed speech: using language to assess first-time users’ conceptualizations of a robot. In: HRI 2010, New York, NY, pp. 267–274 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mumm, J., Mutlu, B.: Human-Robot Proxemics: Physical and Psychological Distancing in Human-Robot Interaction. In: HRI 2011, Lausanne, Switzerland (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Read, R., Belpaeme, T.: Situational Context Directs How People Affectively Interpret Robotic Non-Linguistic Utterances. In: HRI 2014, Bielefeld, Germany (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Schermerhorn, P., Scheutz, M., Crowell, C.R.: Robot social presence and gender: Do females view robots differently than males? In: HRI 2008, pp. 263–270 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sidner, C.L., Lee, C., Kidd, C.D., Lesh, N., Rich, C.: Explorations in Engagement for Humans and Robots. Artificial Intelligence 166(1-2), 140–164 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sidner, C., Lee, C.: Attentional Gestures in Dialogues between People and Robots. In: Nishida, T. (ed.) Engineering Approaches to Conversational Informatics. Wiley and Sons (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Takayama, L., Pantofaru, C.: Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction. In: IROS 2009, pp. 5495–5502 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Tench, P.: The Intonation Systems of English. Cassell, London (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S.N., Koay, K.L.: Robotic Etiquette: Results from User Studies Involving a Fetch and Carry Task. In: HRI 2007, pp. 317–324 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Yasumoto, M., Kamide, H., Mae, Y., Kawabe, K., Sigemi, S., Hirose, M., Arai, T.: Personal space of humans in relation with humanoid robots depending on the presentation method. In: IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration, pp. 797–801 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Fischer, K., Jensen, L.C., Bodenhagen, L. (2014). To Beep or Not to Beep Is Not the Whole Question. In: Beetz, M., Johnston, B., Williams, MA. (eds) Social Robotics. ICSR 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8755. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11973-1_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11973-1_16

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-11972-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-11973-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics