research-article

Open access

What Pronouns for Pepper? A Critical Review of Gender/ing in Research

Authors:

Alexa FrankAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Article No.: 239, Pages 1 - 15

https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501996

Published: 29 April 2022 Publication History

All formats PDF

First page of PDF

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (3491102.3501996-talk-video.mp4)

Talk Video

Download
89.11 MB

References

[1]

Annamma, S.A., Jackson, D.D. and Morrison, D. 2017. Conceptualizing color-evasiveness: Using dis/ability critical race theory to expand a color-blind racial ideology in education and society. Race Ethnicity and Education. 20, 2 (Mar. 2017), 147–162.

[2]

Ansara, Y.G. and Hegarty, P. 2012. Cisgenderism in psychology: Pathologising and misgendering children from 1999 to 2008. Psychology & Sexuality. 3, 2 (May 2012), 137–160.

[3]

Banks, J. and Edwards, A. 2019. A common social distance scale for robots and humans*. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–6.

[4]

Bardzell, S. 2010. Feminist HCI: Taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Atlanta, Georgia, USA, Apr. 2010), 1301–1310.

Digital Library

[5]

Bartneck, C., Yogeeswaran, K., Ser, Q.M., Woodward, G., Sparrow, R., Wang, S. and Eyssel, F. 2018. Robots and racism. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Chicago, IL, USA, Feb. 2018), 196–204.

[6]

de Beauvoir, S. 2011. The Second Sex. Vintage Books.

[7]

Bègue, L., Sarda, E., Gentile, D.A., Bry, C. and Roché, S. 2017. Video Games Exposure and Sexism in a Representative Sample of Adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology. 8, (2017), 466.

[8]

Belpaeme, T., Kennedy, J., Ramachandran, A., Scassellati, B. and Tanaka, F. 2018. Social robots for education: A review. Science Robotics. 3, 21 (Aug. 2018).

[9]

Ben-Youssef, A., Clavel, C., Essid, S., Bilac, M., Chamoux, M. and Lim, A. 2017. UE-HRI: A new dataset for the study of user engagement in spontaneous human-robot interactions. Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction (Glasgow, UK, Nov. 2017), 464–472.

Digital Library

[10]

Beraldo, G., Di Battista, S., Badaloni, S., Menegatti, E. and Pivetti, M. 2018. Sex differences in expectations and perception of a social robot. 2018 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (Genova, Italy, Sep. 2018), 38–43.

Digital Library

[11]

Beraldo, G., Menegatti, E., de Tommasi, V., Mancin, R. and Benini, F. 2019. A preliminary investigation of using humanoid social robots as non-pharmacological techniques with children. 2019 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (Beijing, China, Oct. 2019), 393–400.

Digital Library

[12]

Berg, A.-J. and Lie, M. 1995. Feminism and constructivism: Do artifacts have gender? Science, Technology, & Human Values. 20, 3 (Jul. 1995), 332–351.

[13]

Bernotat, J., Eyssel, F. and Sachse, J. 2019. The (Fe)male Robot: How Robot Body Shape Impacts First Impressions and Trust Towards Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics. (May 2019).

[14]

Bishop, L., Van Maris, A., Dogramadzi, S. and Zook, N. 2019. Social robots: The influence of human and robot characteristics on acceptance. Paladyn. 10, 1 (2019), 346–358.

[15]

Bødker, S. 2006. When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges. Proceedings of the 4th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: changing roles (New York, NY, Oct. 2006), 1–8.

Digital Library

[16]

Brandão, M. 2021. Normative roboticists: The visions and values of technical robotics papers. 2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (Vancouver, BC, Aug. 2021), 671–677.

Digital Library

[17]

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology. 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.

[18]

Bryant, D., Borenstein, J. and Howard, A. 2020. Why should we gender? The effect of robot gendering and occupational stereotypes on human trust and perceived competency. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Mar. 2020), 13–21.

Digital Library

[19]

Butler, J. 2011. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge.

[20]

Carpenter, J., Davis, J.M., Erwin-Stewart, N., Lee, T.R., Bransford, J.D. and Vye, N. 2009. Gender representation and humanoid robots designed for domestic use. International Journal of Social Robotics. 1, 3 (Mar. 2009), 261.

[21]

Carros, F., Meurer, J., Löffler, D., Unbehaun, D., Matthies, S., Koch, I., Wieching, R., Randall, D., Hassenzahl, M. and Wulf, V. 2020. Exploring human-robot interaction with the elderly: Results from a ten-week case study in a care home. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA, Apr. 2020), 1–12.

Digital Library

[22]

Castellano, G., Carolis, B.D., Macchiarulo, N. and Rossano, V. 2019. Learning waste recycling by playing with a social robot. 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Bari, Italy, Oct. 2019), 3805–3810.

Digital Library

[23]

Chanseau, A., Dautenhahn, K., Walters, M.L., Koay, K.L., Lakatos, G. and Salem, M. 2018. Does the appearance of a robot influence people's perception of task criticality? 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 1057–1062.

[24]

Chatterji, N., Allen, C. and Chernova, S. 2019. Effectiveness of robot communication level on likeability, understandability and comfortability. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–7.

[25]

Cheon, E. and Su, N.M. 2016. Integrating roboticist values into a value sensitive design framework for humanoid robots. Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (Christchurch, New Zealand, Mar. 2016), 375–382.

[26]

Chin, C. and Robison, M. 2020. How AI bots and voice assistants reinforce gender bias. Brookings.

[27]

Chivukula, S.S. 2020. Feminisms through design: A practical guide to implement and extend feminism: position. Interactions. 27, 6 (Nov. 2020), 36–39.

Digital Library

[28]

Chivukula, S.S. and Gray, C.M. 2020. Bardzell's “Feminist HCI” legacy: Analyzing citational patterns. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, Apr. 2020), 1–8.

Digital Library

[29]

Clayton, J.A. and Tannenbaum, C. 2016. Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research? JAMA. 316, 18 (Nov. 2016), 1863–1864.

[30]

Cormons, L., Poulet, C., Pellier, D., Pesty, S. and Fiorino, H. 2020. Testing social robot acceptance: What if you could be assessed for dementia by a robot? A pilot study. 2020 6th International Conference on Mechatronics and Robotics Engineering (Barcelona, Spain, Feb. 2020), 92–98.

[31]

Craenen, B., Deshmukh, A., Foster, M.E. and Vinciarelli, A. 2018. Do we really like robots that match our personality? The case of big-five traits, Godspeed scores and robotic gestures. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 626–631.

[32]

Crowell, C.R., Villanoy, M., Scheutzz, M. and Schermerhornz, P. 2009. Gendered voice and robot entities: Perceptions and reactions of male and female subjects. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (St. Louis, MO, Oct. 2009), 3735–3741.

[33]

Cruz-Maya, A. and Tapus, A. 2017. Learning users’ and personality-gender preferences in close human-robot interaction. 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Daegu, South Korea, Aug. 2017), 791–798.

[34]

Damholdt, M.F., Vestergaard, C. and Seibt, J. 2021. Ascribing gender to a social robot. Culturally Sustainable Social Robotics: Proceedings of Robophilosophy 2020 (2021), 247–256.

[35]

De Carolis, B., Macchiarulo, N. and Palestra, G. 2019. Soft biometrics for social adaptive robots. Advances and Trends in Artificial Intelligence: From Theory to Practice (Graz, Austria, 2019), 687–699.

[36]

Dereshev, D., Kirk, D., Matsumura, K. and Maeda, T. 2019. Long-term value of social robots through the eyes of expert users. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland, May 2019), 1–12.

Digital Library

[37]

Di Nuovo, A., Varrasi, S., Conti, D., Bamsforth, J., Lucas, A., Soranzo, A. and McNamara, J. 2019. Usability evaluation of a robotic system for cognitive testing. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 588–589.

[38]

Esposito, A., Amorese, T., Cuciniello, M., Pica, I., Riviello, M.T., Troncone, A., Cordasco, G. and Esposito, A.M. 2019. Elders prefer female robots with a high degree of human likeness. 2019 IEEE 23rd International Symposium on Consumer Technologies (Ancona, Italy, Jun. 2019), 243–246.

[39]

Everett, C. 2011. Gender, pronouns and thought: The ligature between epicene pronouns and a more neutral gender perception. Gender & Language. 5, 1 (2011), 133–152.

[40]

Eyssel, F. and Hegel, F. 2012. (S)he's got the look: Gender stereotyping of robots. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 42, 9 (2012), 2213–2230.

[41]

Fausto-Sterling, A. 2000. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. Basic Books.

[42]

Feil-Seifer, D., Haring, K.S., Rossi, S., Wagner, A.R. and Williams, T. 2020. Where to next? The impact of COVID-19 on human-robot interaction research. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction. 10, 1 (Jun. 2020), 1:1-1:7.

Digital Library

[43]

Feingold Polak, R. and Tzedek, S.L. 2020. Social robot for rehabilitation: Expert clinicians and post-stroke patients’ evaluation following a long-term intervention. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, UK, Mar. 2020), 151–160.

Digital Library

[44]

Fessler, L. 2017. We tested bots like Siri and Alexa to see who would stand up to sexual harassment. Quartz.

[45]

Freud, S. 1994. The social construction of gender. Journal of Adult Development. 1, 1 (Jan. 1994), 37–45.

[46]

Haimson, O.L., Gorrell, D., Starks, D.L. and Weinger, Z. 2020. Designing trans technology: Defining challenges and envisioning community-centered solutions. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA, Apr. 2020), 1–13.

Digital Library

[47]

Harding, S.G. 1986. The science question in feminism. Cornell University Press.

[48]

Hepburn, A. 2003. An Introduction to Critical Social Psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd.

[49]

Hirschmanner, M., Tsiourti, C., Patten, T. and Vincze, M. 2019. Virtual reality teleoperation of a humanoid robot using markerless human upper body pose imitation. 2019 IEEE-RAS 19th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Toronto, ON, Oct. 2019), 259–265.

Digital Library

[50]

Hoewe, J. 2017. Manipulation Check. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods. American Cancer Society. 1–5.

[51]

Horie, T. and Takashio, K. 2018. Handling conversation interruption in many-to-many HRI interaction considering emotional behaviors and human relationships. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 528–533.

[52]

Hsieh, H.-F. and Shannon, S.E. 2005. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research. 15, 9 (Nov. 2005), 1277–1288.

[53]

Hsieh, W.F., Sato-Shimokawara, E. and Yamaguchi, T. 2017. Enhancing the familiarity for humanoid robot pepper by adopting customizable motion. 43rd Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (Beijing, China, Oct. 2017), 8497–8502.

[54]

Hwang, G., Lee, J., Oh, C.Y. and Lee, J. 2019. It Sounds Like A Woman: Exploring Gender Stereotypes in South Korean Voice Assistants. Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY, USA, May 2019), 1–6.

[55]

Hyde, J.S., Bigler, R.S., Joel, D., Tate, C.C. and van Anders, S.M. 2019. The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist. 74, 2 (2019), 171–193.

[56]

Iacob, D. and Tapus, A. 2018. First attempts in deception detection in hri by using thermal and RGB-D cameras. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 652–658.

[57]

Iacob, D.-O. and Tapus, A. 2019. Detecting deception in HRI using minimally-invasive and noninvasive techniques. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–7.

[58]

Ikeda S. and Yamasaki A. 2014. 「人工知能」誌の表紙デザイン意見・議論に接して─視覚表象研究の視点から─ (Analyses of opinions and arguments of the Journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence─from the viewpoint of visual representation studies─). 人工知能.

[59]

Irfan, B., Hellou, M., Mazel, A. and Belpaeme, T. 2020. Challenges of a real-world HRI study with non-native English speakers: Can personalisation save the day? Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, UK, Mar. 2020), 272–274.

Digital Library

[60]

Iwabuchi, K. 2002. Recentering Globalization: Popular Culture and Japanese Transnationalism. Duke University Press.

[61]

Jackson, R.B., Wen, R. and Williams, T. 2019. Tact in noncompliance: The need for pragmatically apt responses to unethical commands. Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (Honolulu, HI, Jan. 2019), 499–505.

Digital Library

[62]

Jackson, R.B. and Williams, T. 2019. Language-capable robots may inadvertently weaken human moral norms. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 401–410.

[63]

Jackson, R.B., Williams, T. and Smith, N. 2020. Exploring the role of gender in perceptions of robotic noncompliance. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, United Kingdom, Mar. 2020), 559–567.

Digital Library

[64]

Jacobs, S.-E., Thomas, W. and Lang, S. 1997. Two-spirit People: Native American Gender Identity, Sexuality, and Spirituality. University of Illinois Press.

[65]

Jaroszewski, S., Lottridge, D., Haimson, O.L. and Quehl, K. 2018. “Genderfluid” or “attack helicopter”: Responsible HCI research practice with non-binary gender variation in online communities. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Apr. 2018), 1–15.

Digital Library

[66]

Jensen, L. and Allen, M. 1996. Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Qualitative Health Research. 6, 4 (Nov. 1996), 553–560.

[67]

Jewell, C.I.C., Elprama, S.A., Jacobs, A., Esteban, P.G., Bagheri, E. and Vanderborght, B. 2019. Why children prefer extrovert or introvert robots: A pilot study using pairwise robot comparison. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 590–591.

[68]

Jule, A. 2014. Gender Theory. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. A.C. Michalos, ed. Springer Netherlands. 2464–2466.

[69]

Jung, E.H., Waddell, T.F. and Sundar, S.S. 2016. Feminizing robots: User responses to gender cues on robot body and screen. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, CA, May 2016), 3107–3113.

Digital Library

[70]

Kaipainen, K., Ahtinen, A. and Hiltunen, A. 2018. Nice surprise, more present than a machine: Experiences evoked by a social robot for guidance and edutainment at a city service point. Proceedings of the 22nd International Academic Mindtrek Conference (Tampere, Finland, Oct. 2018), 163–171.

Digital Library

[71]

Kirkpatrick, K. 2016. Battling algorithmic bias: How do we ensure algorithms treat us fairly? Communications of the ACM. 59, 10 (Sep. 2016), 16–17.

Digital Library

[72]

Kitchenham, B. 2004. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University. 33, 2004 (2004), 1–26.

[73]

Kochigami, K., Okada, K. and Inaba, M. 2018. Does an introduction of a person in a group by a robot have a positive effect on people's communication? 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 692–698.

[74]

Koller, M., Bauer, D., de Pagter, J., Papagni, G. and Vincze, M. 2019. A pilot study on determining the relation between gaze aversion and interaction experience. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 644–645.

[75]

Koschate, M., Potter, R., Bremner, P. and Levine, M. 2016. Overcoming the uncanny valley: Displays of emotions reduce the uncanniness of humanlike robots. 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Christchurch, New Zealand, Mar. 2016), 359–366.

[76]

Krippendorff, K. 2018. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. SAGE Publications.

[77]

Kuchenbrandt, D., Häring, M., Eichberg, J. and Eyssel, F. 2012. Keep an eye on the task! How gender typicality of tasks influence human–robot interactions. Social Robotics (Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012), 448–457.

Digital Library

[78]

Kuo, I.H., Rabindran, J.M., Broadbent, E., Lee, Y.I., Kerse, N., Stafford, R.M.Q. and MacDonald, B.A. 2009. Age and gender factors in user acceptance of healthcare robots. The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Sep. 2009), 214–219.

[79]

Leonardi, N., Manca, M., Paternò, F. and Santoro, C. 2019. Trigger-action programming for personalising humanoid robot behaviour. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland, May 2019), 1–13.

Digital Library

[80]

Li, C., Androulakaki, T., Gao, A.Y., Yang, F., Saikia, H., Peters, C. and Skantze, G. 2018. Effects of posture and embodiment on social distance in human-agent interaction in mixed reality. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents (Sydney, NSW, Australia, Nov. 2018), 191–196.

Digital Library

[81]

Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P.C., Ioannidis, J.P.A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P.J., Kleijnen, J. and Moher, D. 2009. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine. 6, 7 (Jul. 2009).

[82]

Lips, H.M. 2020. Sex and Gender: An Introduction. Waveland Press.

[83]

Löffler, D., Dörrenbächer, J., Welge, J. and Hassenzahl, M. 2020. Hybridity as design strategy for service robots to become domestic products. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, Apr. 2020), 1–8.

Digital Library

[84]

Lopez, M.G., Hasegawa, K. and Imai, M. 2017. Adaptive behavior generation for conversational robot in human-robot negotiation environment. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction (Bielefeld, Germany, Oct. 2017), 151–159.

Digital Library

[85]

Mallett, R.K. and Wagner, D.E. 2011. The unexpectedly positive consequences of confronting sexism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 47, 1 (Jan. 2011), 215–220.

[86]

Männistö-Funk, T. and Sihvonen, T. 2018. Voices from the uncanny valley: How robots and artificial intelligences talk back to us. Digital Culture & Society. 4, 1 (Mar. 2018), 45–64.

[87]

van Maris, A., Sutherland, A., Mazel, A., Dogramadzi, S., Zook, N., Studley, M., Winfield, A. and Caleb-Solly, P. 2020. The impact of affective verbal expressions in social robots. Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, UK, Mar. 2020), 508–510.

Digital Library

[88]

McCabe, J.L. and Holmes, D. 2009. Reflexivity, critical qualitative research and emancipation: a Foucauldian perspective. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 65, 7 (2009), 1518–1526.

[89]

McGinn, C. and Torre, I. 2019. Can you tell the robot by the voice? An exploratory study on the role of voice in the perception of robots. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 211–221.

[90]

Morita, T., Kashiwagi, N., Yorozu, A., Walch, M., Suzuki, H., Karagiannis, D. and Yamaguchi, T. 2018. Practice of multi-robot teahouse based on PRINTEPS and evaluation of service quality. 2018 IEEE 42nd Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference (Tokyo, Japan, Jul. 2018), 147–152.

[91]

Mubin, O., Kharub, I. and Khan, A. 2020. Pepper in the library: Students’ first impressions. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, Apr. 2020), 1–9.

Digital Library

[92]

Mutlu, B., Osman, S., Forlizzi, J., Hodgins, J. and Kiesler, S. 2006. Task structure and user attributes as elements of human-robot interaction design. The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Hatfield, UK, Sep. 2006), 74–79.

[93]

Nass, C., Moon, Y. and Green, N. 1997. Are machines gender neutral? Gender-stereotypic responses to computers with voices. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 27, 10 (1997), 864–876.

[94]

Natarajan, M. and Gombolay, M. 2020. Effects of anthropomorphism and accountability on trust in human robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, UK, Mar. 2020), 33–42.

Digital Library

[95]

Nomura, T. 2019. A possibility of inappropriate use of gender studies in human-robot Interaction. AI & SOCIETY. (Sep. 2019).

Digital Library

[96]

Nomura, T. 2017. Robots and Gender. Principles of Gender-Specific Medicine. M.J. Legato, ed. Academic Press. 695–703.

[97]

Ogbonnaya-Ogburu, I.F., Smith, A.D.R., To, A. and Toyama, K. 2020. Critical race theory for HCI. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA, Apr. 2020), 1–16.

Digital Library

[98]

Okamura, E. and Tanaka, F. 2017. Design of a robot that is capable of high fiving with humans. 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Lisbon, Portugal, Aug. 2017), 704–711.

[99]

van Oost, E.C.J. 2003. Materialized gender: How shavers configure the users’ feminity and masculinity. How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology. N.E.J. Oudshoorn and T. Pinch, eds. MIT Press. 193–208.

[100]

Orefice, P.-H., Ammi, M., Hafez, M. and Tapus, A. 2018. Pressure variation study in human-human and human-robot handshakes: Impact of the mood. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 247–254.

[101]

Oto, K., Feng, J. and Imai, M. 2017. Investigating how people deal with silence in a human-robot conversation. 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Lisbon, Portugal, Aug. 2017), 195–200.

[102]

Otterbacher, J. and Talias, M. 2017. S/he's too warm/agentic! The influence of gender on uncanny reactions to robots. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Vienna, Austria, Mar. 2017), 214–223.

Digital Library

[103]

Pandey, A.K. and Gelin, R. 2018. A mass-produced sociable humanoid robot: Pepper: The first machine of its kind. IEEE Robotics Automation Magazine. 25, 3 (Sep. 2018), 40–48.

[104]

Peng, Z., Kwon, Y., Lu, J., Wu, Z. and Ma, X. 2019. Design and evaluation of service robot's proactivity in decision-making support process. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk, May 2019), 1–13.

Digital Library

[105]

Peters, C., Li, C., Yang, F., Avramova, V. and Skantze, G. 2018. Investigating Social Distances between Humans, Virtual Humans and Virtual Robots in Mixed Reality. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems (Richland, SC, Jul. 2018), 2247–2249.

[106]

Peterson, J., Cohen, C., Harrison, P., Novak, J., Tossell, C. and Phillips, E. 2019. Ideal warrior and robot relations: Stress and empathy's role in human-robot teaming. 2019 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (Charlottesville, VA, Apr. 2019), 1–6.

[107]

Powers, A. and Kiesler, S. 2006. The advisor robot: Tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction (New York, NY, Mar. 2006), 218–225.

Digital Library

[108]

Powers, A., Kramer, A.D.I., Lim, S., Kuo, J., Sau-lai Lee and Kiesler, S. 2005. Eliciting information from people with a gendered humanoid robot. 2005 IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nashville, TN, Aug. 2005), 158–163.

[109]

van der Putte, D., Boumans, R., Neerincx, M., Rikkert, M.O. and de Mul, M. 2019. A social robot for autonomous health data acquisition among hospitalized patients: An exploratory field study. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 658–659.

[110]

Rasch, R., Wachsmuth, S. and König, M. 2018. A joint motion model for human-like robot-human handover. 2018 IEEE-RAS 18th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Beijing, China, Nov. 2018), 180–187.

Digital Library

[111]

Rea, D.J., Wang, Y. and Young, J.E. 2015. Check your stereotypes at the door: An analysis of gender typecasts in social human-robot interaction. Social Robotics: Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Social Robotics (ICSR 2015) (Cham, 2015), 554–563.

Digital Library

[112]

Reeves, B. and Nass, C. 1996. The Media Equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press.

[113]

Reich-Stiebert, N. and Eyssel, F. 2017. (Ir)relevance of gender? On the influence of gender stereotypes on learning with a robot. 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Vienna, Austria, Mar. 2017), 166–176.

[114]

Richards, C., Bouman, W.P., Seal, L., Barker, M.J., Nieder, T.O. and T'Sjoen, G. 2016. Non-binary or genderqueer genders. International Review of Psychiatry. 28, 1 (Jan. 2016), 95–102.

[115]

Robertson, J. 2010. Gendering humanoid robots: Robo-sexism in Japan. Body & Society. (Jul. 2010).

[116]

Robertson, J. 2017. Robo Sapiens Japanicus: Robots, Gender, Family, and the Japanese Nation. Univ of California Press.

[117]

Rode, J.A. 2011. Reflexivity in digital anthropology. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Vancouver, BC, 2011), 123–132.

Digital Library

[118]

Roff, H.M. 2016. Gendering a Warbot. International Feminist Journal of Politics. 18, 1 (Jan. 2016), 1–18.

[119]

Rogers, K., Bryant, D. and Howard, A. 2020. Robot gendering: Influences on trust, occupational competency, and preference of robot over human. Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, Apr. 2020), 1–7.

Digital Library

[120]

Romeo, M., Hernández García, D., Jones, R. and Cangelosi, A. 2019. Deploying a deep learning agent for HRI with potential “end-users” at multiple sheltered housing sites. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (Kyoto, Japan, Sep. 2019), 81–88.

Digital Library

[121]

Rose, E.J. and Björling, E.A. 2017. Designing for engagement: Using participatory design to develop a social robot to measure teen stress. Proceedings of the 35th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication (Halifax, NS, Aug. 2017), 1–10.

[122]

Rossi, S., Cimmino, T., Matarese, M. and Raiano, M. 2019. Coherent and incoherent robot emotional behavior for humorous and engaging recommendations. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–6.

[123]

Rossi, S., Santangelo, G., Staffa, M., Varrasi, S., Conti, D. and Di Nuovo, A. 2018. Psychometric evaluation supported by a social robot: Personality factors and technology acceptance. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Nanjing/Tai'An, China, Aug. 2018), 802–807.

[124]

Roth, A.M., Reig, S., Bhatt, U., Shulgach, J., Amin, T., Doryab, A., Fang, F. and Veloso, M. 2019. A robot's expressive language affects human strategy and perceptions in a competitive game. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–8.

[125]

Sanoubari, E., Geiskkovitch, D.Y., Garcha, D.S., Sabab, S.A., Hong, K., Young, J.E., Bunt, A. and Irani, P. 2018. Subliminal priming in human-agent interaction: Can agents use single-frame visuals in video feeds to shape user perceptions? Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction (Southampton, UK, Dec. 2018), 205–213.

Digital Library

[126]

Schermerhorn, P., Scheutz, M. and Crowell, C.R. 2008. Robot social presence and gender: Do females view robots differently than males? Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (New York, NY, Mar. 2008), 263–270.

Digital Library

[127]

Schiebinger, L. 2019. The robots are coming! But should they be gendered? AWIS Magazine.

[128]

Schlesinger, A., Edwards, W.K. and Grinter, R.E. 2017. Intersectional HCI: Engaging identity through gender, race, and class. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, May 2017), 5412–5427.

Digital Library

[129]

Seaborn, K., Miyake, N.P., Pennefather, P. and Otake-Matsuura, M. 2021. Voice in human-agent interaction: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 54, 4 (2021), Article No. 81.

Digital Library

[130]

Shen, Z., Elibol, A. and Chong, N.Y. 2019. Nonverbal behavior cue for recognizing human personality traits in human-robot social interaction. 2019 IEEE 4th International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Mechatronics (Toyonaka, Japan, Jul. 2019), 402–407.

[131]

Siddaway, A.P., Wood, A.M. and Hedges, L.V. 2019. How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology. 70, 1 (2019), 747–770.

[132]

Siegel, M., Breazeal, C. and Norton, M.I. 2009. Persuasive Robotics: The influence of robot gender on human behavior. 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Oct. 2009), 2563–2568.

[133]

Song, F., Eastwood, A.J., Gilbody, S., Duley, L. and Sutton, A.J. 2000. Publication and related biases. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England). 4, 10 (2000), 1–115.

[134]

Søraa, R.A. 2017. Mechanical genders: How do humans gender robots? Gender, Technology and Development. 21, 1–2 (May 2017), 99–115.

[135]

Sparrow, R. 2020. Do robots have race?: Race, social construction, and HRI. IEEE Robotics Automation Magazine. 27, 3 (Sep. 2020), 144–150.

[136]

Sparrow, R. 2017. Robots, Rape, and Representation. International Journal of Social Robotics. 9, 4 (Sep. 2017), 465–477.

[137]

Spence, P.R., Edwards, A. and Edwards, C. 2018. Attitudes, prior interaction, and petitioner credibility predict support for considering the rights of robots. Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Chicago, IL, Mar. 2018), 243–244.

Digital Library

[138]

Spiel, K., Keyes, O. and Barlas, P. 2019. Patching gender: Non-binary utopias in HCI. Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY, May 2019), 1–11.

Digital Library

[139]

Stange, S. and Kopp, S. 2020. Effects of a social robot's self-explanations on how humans understand and evaluate its behavior. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Cambridge, UK, Mar. 2020), 619–627.

Digital Library

[140]

Stermer, S.P. and Burkley, M. 2015. SeX-Box: Exposure to sexist video games predicts benevolent sexism. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 4, 1 (2015), 47–55.

[141]

Strait, M.K., Aguillon, C., Contreras, V. and Garcia, N. 2017. The public's perception of humanlike robots: Online social commentary reflects an appearance-based uncanny valley, a general fear of a “technology takeover”, and the unabashed sexualization of female-gendered robots. 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Lisbon, Portugal, Aug. 2017), 1418–1423.

[142]

Tay, B., Jung, Y. and Park, T. 2014. When stereotypes meet robots: The double-edge sword of robot gender and personality in human–robot interaction. Computers in Human Behavior. 38, (Sep. 2014), 75–84.

Digital Library

[143]

Thellman, S. and Ziemke, T. 2017. Social attitudes toward robots are easily manipulated. Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Vienna, Austria, Mar. 2017), 299–300.

Digital Library

[144]

Thunberg, S., Thellman, S. and Ziemke, T. 2017. Don't judge a book by its cover: A study of the social acceptance of NAO vs. Pepper. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction (Bielefeld, Germany, Oct. 2017), 443–446.

Digital Library

[145]

Tolmeijer, S., Zierau, N., Janson, A., Wahdatehagh, J.S., Leimeister, J.M.M. and Bernstein, A. 2021. Female by Default? Exploring the Effect of Voice Assistant Gender and Pitch on Trait and Trust Attribution. Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY, USA, May 2021), 1–7.

[146]

Tonkin, M., Vitale, J., Herse, S., Raza, S.A., Madhisetty, S., Kang, L., Vu, T.D., Johnston, B. and Williams, M.-A. 2019. Privacy first: Designing responsible and inclusive social robot applications for in the wild studies. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–8.

[147]

Tsiourti, C., Weiss, A., Wac, K. and Vincze, M. 2017. Designing emotionally expressive robots: A comparative study on the perception of communication modalities. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Human Agent Interaction (Bielefeld, Germany, Oct. 2017), 213–222.

Digital Library

[148]

Wang, L., Iocchi, L., Marrella, A. and Nardi, D. 2019. Developing a questionnaire to evaluate customers’ perception in the smart city robotic challenge. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–6.

[149]

Wang, L., Marrella, A. and Nardi, D. 2019. Investigating user perceptions of HRI in social contexts. 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, South Korea, Mar. 2019), 544–545.

[150]

Weber, J. and Bath, C. 2007. “Social” Robots & “Emotional” Software Agents: Gendering Processes and De-Gendering Strategies for “Technologies in the Making.” Gender Designs IT: Construction and Deconstruction of Information Society Technology. I. Zorn, S. Maass, E. Rommes, C. Schirmer, and H. Schelhowe, eds. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 53–63.

[151]

Winkle, K., Caleb-Solly, P., Turton, A. and Bremner, P. 2018. Social Robots for Engagement in Rehabilitative Therapies: Design Implications from a Study with Therapists. Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (New York, NY, USA, 2018), 289–297.

Digital Library

[152]

Winkle, K., Lemaignan, S., Caleb-Solly, P., Leonards, U., Turton, A. and Bremner, P. 2019. Effective persuasion strategies for socially assistive robots. Proceedings of the 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Daegu, Republic of Korea, Mar. 2019), 277–285.

[153]

Ye, S., Neville, G., Schrum, M., Gombolay, M., Chernova, S. and Howard, A. 2019. Human trust after robot mistakes: Study of the effects of different forms of robot communication. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–7.

[154]

Yip, J.C., Sobel, K., Gao, X., Hishikawa, A.M., Lim, A., Meng, L., Ofiana, R.F., Park, J. and Hiniker, A. 2019. Laughing is scary, but farting is cute: A conceptual model of children's perspectives of creepy technologies. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk, May 2019), 1–15.

Digital Library

[155]

Zafari, S., Schwaninger, I., Hirschmanner, M., Schmidbauer, C., Weiss, A. and Koeszegi, S.T. 2019. “You are doing so great!” – The effect of a robot's interaction style on self-efficacy in HRI. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–7.

Digital Library

[156]

Zguda, P., Kołota, A., Jarosz, M., Sondej, F., Izui, T., Dziok, M., Belowska, A., Jędras, W., Venture, G., Śnieżynski, B. and Indurkhya, B. 2019. On the role of trust in child-robot interaction*. 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (New Delhi, India, Oct. 2019), 1–6.

Cited By

Wier LKing Lewis AMcAleavy TLi X(2024)Group Identity, Self-Concept, and Gender Bias: A Regression Analysis of Female Student Experiences Within Emergency Management-Related Higher Education ProgramsJournal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management10.1515/jhsem-2023-0010Online publication date: 12-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2023-0010
de Rijk LBreukelman MDalmaijer EStommel W(2024)‘This uh. . . young lady young gentleman’: Gender attribution in the context of a gender-ambiguous robotDiscourse & Communication10.1177/17504813241267117Online publication date: 13-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813241267117
Cameron HCastle-Green SChughtai MDowthwaite LKucukyilmaz AMaior HNgo VSchneiders EStahl B(2024)A Taxonomy of Domestic Robot Failure Outcomes: Understanding the impact of failure on trustworthiness of domestic robotsProceedings of the Second International Symposium on Trustworthy Autonomous Systems10.1145/3686038.3686050(1-14)Online publication date: 16-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686038.3686050
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

What Pronouns for Pepper? A Critical Review of Gender/ing in Research
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
2. Social and professional topics
  1. User characteristics
    1. Gender

Recommendations

Children’s perceptions of social robots: a study of the robots Pepper, AV1 and Tessa at Norwegian research fairs
Abstract
This article studies perceptual differences of three social robots by elementary school children of ages 6–13 years (n = 107) at research fairs. The autonomous humanoid robot Pepper, an advanced social robot primarily designed as a personal ...
The Shape of Our Bias: Perceived Age and Gender in the Humanoid Robots of the ABOT Database
HRI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

The present study was aimed at determining the age and gender distribution of the humanoid robots in the ABOT dataset, and providing a systematic data-driven formalization of the process of age and gender categorization of humanoid robots. We involved ...
Edutainment Software for the Pepper Robot
ISCSIC 2020: Proceedings of the 2020 4th International Symposium on Computer Science and Intelligent Control

We present our software for the Pepper robot that is suitable for human-robot interaction in the area of edutainment. The combination of education and entertainment is achieved by modifying a state-of-the-art conversational artificial intelligence ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 2022

10459 pages

ISBN:9781450391573

DOI:10.1145/3491102

Editors:
Simone Barbosa
PUC-Rio, Brazil
,
Cliff Lampe
University of Michigan, USA
,
Caroline Appert
Université Paris-Saclay, France
,
David A. Shamma
Toyota Research Institute, USA
,
Steven Drucker
Microsoft Research, USA
,
Julie Williamson
University of Glasgow, UK
,
Koji Yatani
University of Tokyo, Japan

Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 April 2022

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

CHI '22

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI '22: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 29 - May 5, 2022

LA, New Orleans, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Upcoming Conference

CHI '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 26 - May 1, 2025

Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

20
Total Citations
View Citations
2,237
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)788
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)77

Reflects downloads up to 21 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wier LKing Lewis AMcAleavy TLi X(2024)Group Identity, Self-Concept, and Gender Bias: A Regression Analysis of Female Student Experiences Within Emergency Management-Related Higher Education ProgramsJournal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management10.1515/jhsem-2023-0010Online publication date: 12-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2023-0010
de Rijk LBreukelman MDalmaijer EStommel W(2024)‘This uh. . . young lady young gentleman’: Gender attribution in the context of a gender-ambiguous robotDiscourse & Communication10.1177/17504813241267117Online publication date: 13-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813241267117
Cameron HCastle-Green SChughtai MDowthwaite LKucukyilmaz AMaior HNgo VSchneiders EStahl B(2024)A Taxonomy of Domestic Robot Failure Outcomes: Understanding the impact of failure on trustworthiness of domestic robotsProceedings of the Second International Symposium on Trustworthy Autonomous Systems10.1145/3686038.3686050(1-14)Online publication date: 16-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3686038.3686050
Seaborn KUrakami JPennefather PMiyake N(2024)Qualitative Approaches to Voice UXACM Computing Surveys10.1145/365866656:12(1-34)Online publication date: 20-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3658666
Taylor JSimpson ETran ABrubaker JFox SZhu H(2024)Cruising Queer HCI on the DL: A Literature Review of LGBTQ+ People in HCIProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642494(1-21)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642494
Fujii TSeaborn KSteeds M(2024)Silver-Tongued and Sundry: Exploring Intersectional Pronouns with ChatGPTProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642303(1-14)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642303
Korpan REguchi AHan ZOstrowski ARavindranath STanevska AGrollman DBroadbent EJu WSoh HWilliams T(2024)3rd Workshop on Inclusive HRI: Equity and Diversity in Design, Application, Methods, and CommunityCompanion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610978.3638153(1329-1331)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610978.3638153
Stolp-Smith MWilliams TGrollman DBroadbent EJu WSoh HWilliams T(2024)More Than Binary: Transgender and Non-binary Perspectives on Human Robot InteractionProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634939(697-705)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610977.3634939
Frumer YŠabanović S(2024) The Politics of Mise-en-Scène Technologies East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal10.1080/18752160.2024.235077218:2(233-244)Online publication date: 11-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1080/18752160.2024.2350772
Koban KBanks J(2024)It feels, therefore it isComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2023.108098153:COnline publication date: 12-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2023.108098
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents