research-article

Levels of embodiment: linguistic analyses of factors influencing hri

Authors:

Kerstin Fischer,

Katrin S. Lohan,

Kilian FothAuthors Info & Claims

HRI '12: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Pages 463 - 470

https://doi.org/10.1145/2157689.2157839

Published: 05 March 2012 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the role of physical embodiment of a robot and its degrees of freedom in HRI. Both factors have been suggested to be relevant in definitions of embodiment, and so far we do not understand their effects on the way people interact with robots very well. Linguistic analyses of verbal interactions with robots differing with respect to physical embodiment and degrees of freedom provide a useful methodology to investigate factors conditioning human-robot interaction. Results show that both physical embodiment and degrees of freedom influence interaction, and that the effect of physical embodiment is located in the interpersonal domain, concerning in how far the robot is perceived as an interaction partner, whereas degrees of freedom influence the way users project the suitability of the robot for the current task.

References

[1]

Bainbridge, W. A., Hart, J. W., Kim, E. S. and Scasselati, B. 2010. The Benefit of Interactions with Physically Present Robots over Video-Displayed Agents. International Journal of Social Robotics 1-2.

[2]

Cross, T., Johnson-Morris, J. E. and T. G. Nienhuys. 1980. Linguistic Feedback and Maternal Speech: Comparisons of Mothers Addressing Hearing and Hearing-impaired Children. First Language 1, 3:163--189.

[3]

Dautenhahn, K., B. Ogden and T. Quick. 2002. From Embodied to Socially Embedded Agents - Implications for Interaction-aware Robots. Cognitive Systems Research 3: 397--428.

Digital Library

[4]

Diewald, G. 2006. Discourse Particles and Modal Particles as Grammatical Elements. In Fischer, K. (ed.): Approaches to Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

[5]

Fischer, K. 2006. What Computer Talk is and Isn't: Human-Computer Conversation as Intercultural Communication. AQ, Saarbrücken.

[6]

Fischer, K. 2007. Grounding and common ground: Modal particles and their translation equivalents. In A. Fetzer and K. Fischer (eds.), Lexical Markers of Common Grounds. Studies in Pragmatics 3. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

[7]

Fischer, K. 2011. Interpersonal Variation in Understanding Robots as Social Actors. HRI'11, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Digital Library

[8]

Fischer, K., Foth, K., Rohlfing, K. and B. Wrede,. 2011. Mindful Tutors: Linguistic Choice and Action Demonstration in Speech to Infants and a Simulated Robot. Interaction Studies 12, 1: 134--161.

[9]

Foth, K., Menzel, W. and Schröder, I. 2000. A Transformation-based Parsing Technique with Anytime Properties. 4th Int. Workshop on Parsing Technologies, IWPT-2000, pp. 89--100.

[10]

Fussell, S. R., Kiesler, S., Setlock, L. D. and Yew, V. 2008. How people anthropomorphize robots. Proceedings of Human-Robot Interaction 2008 (pp. 145--152). NY: ACM Press.

Digital Library

[11]

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. 2004. Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.

[12]

Hawkins, J. A. 1994. A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency. Cambridge University Press.

[13]

Hoffmann, L. and Krämer, N. C. 2011. How Should an Artificial Entity be Embodied? Comparing the Effects of a Physically Present Robot and its Virtual Representation. Proceedings of the HRI 2011 Workshop on Social Robotic Telepresence, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp. 14--20.

[14]

Itti, L., Koch, C. Niebur, L. et al. 1998. A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis. IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1254--1259.

Digital Library

[15]

Kidd, C. and Breazeal, C. 2004. Effect of a Robot on Uer Perceptions. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots nd Systems, pp. 3559--3564.

[16]

Kiesler, S., Powers, A., Fussell, S. and Torrey, C. 2008. Anthropomorphic Interactions with a Robot and Robot-like Agent. Social Cognition 26, 2: 169--181.

[17]

Koda, T. and P. Maes. 1996. Agents with Faces: The Effect of Personification. Fifth IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Communication.

[18]

Komatsu, T. and Abe, Y. 2008. Comparing an On-Screen Agent with a Robotic Agent in Non-Face-to-Face Interactions. In Prendinger, H., Lester, J. and Ishizuka, M. (eds.), IVA 2008. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 498--504.

Digital Library

[19]

Komatsu, T. and Kuki, N. 2009a. Can Users React toward an On-Screen Agent as if they are Reacting toward a Robotic Agent? HRI'09, La Jolla, CA, pp. 217--218.

Digital Library

[20]

Komatsu, T. and Kuki, N. 2009b. Investigating the Contributing Factors to Make Users React toward an On-Screen Agent as if they are Reacting toward a Robotic Agent. 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Toyama, Japan.

[21]

Lohan, K., Gieselmann, S., Vollmer, A. L., Rohlfing, K. and B. Wrede. 2010. Does Embodiment Affect Tutoring Behavior? Proceedings of ICDL'10.

[22]

Lopes, M., Bernardino, A., Santos-Victor, K. Rosander, and C. von Hofsten,. 2009. Biomimetic Eye-Neck Coordination. ICDL 2009.

Digital Library

[23]

Lusk, M. M. and R. K. Atkinson. 2007. Animated Pedagogical Agents: Does their Degree of Embodiment Impact Learning from Static or Animated Worked Examples? Applied Cognitive Psychology 21: 747--764.

[24]

Metta, G. Sandini, G. Vernon, D. Natale, L. and F. Nori,. 2008. The iCub humanoid robot: an open platform for research in embodied cognition. PerMIS: Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems Workshop. Aug, 2008, pp. 19--21.

Digital Library

[25]

Nagai, Y. and Rohlfing, K. J. 2009. Computational analysis of Motionese toward scaffolding robot action learning. IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development 1: 44--54.

Digital Library

[26]

Nass, C. 2004. Etiquette Equality: Exhibitions and Expectations of Computer Politeness. Communications of the ACM 47, 4: 35--37.

Digital Library

[27]

Roy, B., Frank, M. C. and Roy, D. 2009. Exploring word learning in a high-density longitudinal corpus. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Amsterdam, Netherlands.

[28]

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. and Jefferson, G. 1974. A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn Taking for Conversation. Language 50: 696--735.

[29]

Sproull, L., Subramani, R., Kiesler, S., Walker, J., and Waters, K. 1996. When the interface is a face. Human-Computer Interaction 11, 97--124.

Digital Library

[30]

Takayama, L. 2009. Making Sense of Agentic Objects and Teleoperation: In-the-moment and Reflective Perspectives. Late Breaking Results of Human Robot Interaction (HRI), San Diego, CA, pp. 239--240.

Digital Library

[31]

Wainer, J., Feil-Seigfer, D. J., Shell, D. A. and Mataric, M. J. 2007. Embodiment and Human-Robot Interaction: A Task-Based Perspective. 16th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Jeju, Korea.

[32]

Zeschel, A. forthcoming. Basic Argument Structure Constructions in Child-Directed Speech. Journal of Child Language.

[33]

Ziemke, T. 2003. What's that Thing Called Embodiment? In: Alterman and Kirsh (eds.) Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1134--1139). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cited By

Tsoi NSterneck RZhao XVázquez M(2024)Influence of Simulation and Interactivity on Human Perceptions of a Robot During Navigation TasksACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3675784Online publication date: 16-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3675784
Ren YClement J(2024)Augmenting Human Teams with Robots in Knowledge Work Settings: Insights from the LiteratureACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/364988413:2(1-34)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649884
Jia HAppelman AWu MBien-Aime S(2024)News bylines and perceived AI authorship: Effects on source and message credibilityComputers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100093(100093)Online publication date: Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100093
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Levels of embodiment: linguistic analyses of factors influencing hri
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences

Recommendations

Linguistic politeness and face-work in computer-mediated communication, Part 1: A theoretical framework

Our daily social interaction is anchored in interpersonal discourse; accordingly, the phenomenon of linguistic politeness is prevalent in daily social interaction. Such linguistic behavior underscores the fact that linguistic politeness is a critical ...
The Role of Embodiment and Simulation in Evaluating HCI: Theory and Framework
Digital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management. Human Body, Motion and Behavior
Abstract
In this paper, we argue that embodiment can play an important role in the evaluation of systems developed for Human Computer Interaction. To this end, we describe a simulation platform for building Embodied Human Computer Interactions (EHCI). This ...
Embodiment and multimodality
ICMI '06: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Multimodal interfaces

Students who are blind are typically one to three years behind their seeing counterparts in mathematics and science. We posit that a key reason for this resides in the inability of such students to access multimodal embodied communicative behavior of ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

HRI '12: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 2012

518 pages

ISBN:9781450310635

DOI:10.1145/2157689

General Chairs:
Holly Yanco
University of Massachusetts Lowell, USA
,
Aaron Steinfeld
Carnegie Mellon University, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Vanessa Evers
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
,
Odest Chadwicke Jenkins
Brown University, USA

Copyright © 2012 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

IEEE-RAS: Robotics and Automation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 05 March 2012

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

HRI'12

Sponsor:

HRI'12: International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 5 - 8, 2012

Massachusetts, Boston, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 268 of 1,124 submissions, 24%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

50
Total Citations
View Citations
579
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)51
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4

Reflects downloads up to 14 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Tsoi NSterneck RZhao XVázquez M(2024)Influence of Simulation and Interactivity on Human Perceptions of a Robot During Navigation TasksACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3675784Online publication date: 16-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1145/3675784
Ren YClement J(2024)Augmenting Human Teams with Robots in Knowledge Work Settings: Insights from the LiteratureACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/364988413:2(1-34)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649884
Jia HAppelman AWu MBien-Aime S(2024)News bylines and perceived AI authorship: Effects on source and message credibilityComputers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100093(100093)Online publication date: Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100093
Gonzalez AMizuuchi I(2023)Physical Embodiment versus Novelty – which influences interactions with Embodied Conversational Agents more?2023 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309561(675-682)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309561
Gross SKrenn B(2023)A Communicative Perspective on Human–Robot Collaboration in Industry: Mapping Communicative Modes on Collaborative ScenariosInternational Journal of Social Robotics10.1007/s12369-023-00991-516:6(1315-1332)Online publication date: 30-Mar-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-00991-5
Tuncer SLicoppe CLuff PHeath C(2023)Recipient design in human–robot interaction: the emergent assessment of a robot’s competenceAI & SOCIETY10.1007/s00146-022-01608-739:4(1795-1810)Online publication date: 5-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01608-7
Toscano ESpitale MGarzotto FSakamoto DWeiss AHiatt LShiomi M(2022)Socially Assistive Robots in Smart HomesProceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.5555/3523760.3523938(1075-1079)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3523760.3523938
Wen RBarton BFauré SWilliams T(2022)Unpretty Please: Ostensibly Polite Wakewords Discourage Politeness in both Robot-Directed and Human-Directed CommunicationProceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction10.1145/3536221.3556615(181-190)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3536221.3556615
Toscano ESpitale MGarzotto F(2022)Socially Assistive Robots in Smart Homes: Design Factors that Influence the User Perception2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)10.1109/HRI53351.2022.9889467(1075-1079)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI53351.2022.9889467
Fischer KJensen LZitzmann N(2022)In the same boatInteraction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial SystemsInteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial SystemsInteraction Studies10.1075/is.00013.fis22:3(488-515)Online publication date: 28-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.00013.fis
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

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

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents