research-article

Open access

Bridging HRI Theory and Practice: Design Guidelines for Robot Communication in Dairy Farming

Authors:

Irene González González,

Marco RozendaalAuthors Info & Claims

HRI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Pages 137 - 146

https://doi.org/10.1145/3610977.3634991

Published: 11 March 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Using HRI theory to inform robot development is an important, but difficult, endeavor. This paper explores the relationship between HRI theory and HRI practice through a design project on the development of design guidelines for human-robot communication together with a dairy farming robot manufacturer. The design guidelines, a type of intermediate-level knowledge, were intended to enrich the specialized knowledge of the company on farming context with relevant academic knowledge. In this process, we identified that HRI theories were used as a frame, a tool, best practices, and a reference; while the HRI practice provided a context, a reference, and validation for the theories. Our intended contribution is to propose a means to facilitate exchanges both ways between HRI theory and practice and add to the emerging repertoire of designerly ways of producing knowledge in HRI.

Supplemental Material

PDF File

Download
2.23 MB

References

[1]

Iina Aaltonen, Timo Salmi, and Ilari Marstio. 2018. Refining levels of collaboration to support the design and evaluation of human--robot interaction in the manufacturing industry. Procedia CIRP 72, 93--98.

[2]

George Adamides, Georgios Christou, Christos Katsanos, Michalis Xenos, and Thanasis Hadzilacos. 2014. Usability guidelines for the design of robot teleoperation: A taxonomy. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 45, no. 2, 256--262.

[3]

Peter Bailis, Simon Peter, and Justine Sherry. 2016. Introducing research for practice. Commun. ACM, 59(9), 38--41. http://doi.org/10.1145/2909474

Digital Library

[4]

Jordan Beck and Hamid R. Ekbia. 2018. The Theory-Practice Gap As Generative Metaphor. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 620. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174194

Digital Library

[5]

Jenay M. Beer, Cory-Ann Smarr, Tiffany L. Chen, Akanksha Prakash, Tracy L. Mitzner, Charles C. Kemp, and Wendy A. Rogers. 2012. The domesticated robot: design guidelines for assisting older adults to age in place. In Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 335--342. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157689.2157806

Digital Library

[6]

Kathleen Belhassein, Víctor Fernández-Castro, Amandine Mayima, Aurélie Clodic, Elisabeth Pacherie, Michèle Guidetti, Rachid Alami, and Hélène Cochet. 2022. Addressing joint action challenges in HRI: Insights from psychology and philosophy. Acta Psychologica 222, 103476.

[7]

Andrew Booth. 2003. Bridging the research-practice gap? The role of evidence based librarianship. New Review of Information and Library Research 9, 1, 3--23.

[8]

Jan O. Borchers. 2000. A pattern approach to interaction design. In Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques (DIS '00). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 369--378. https://doi.org/10.1145/347642.347795

Digital Library

[9]

Kelly Bronson. 2018. Smart farming: including rights holders for responsible agricultural innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review 8, no. 2, 7--14.

[10]

Elizabeth A. Buie, Susan M. Dray, Keith E. Instone, Jhilmil Jain, Gitte Lindgaard, and Arnold M. Lund. 2010. Researcher-practitioner Interaction. In CHI '10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4469--4472.

Digital Library

[11]

Deborah Butler, Lewis Holloway, and Christopher Bear. 2012. The impact of technological change in dairy farming: robotic milking systems and the changing role of the stockperson. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England 173, no. 622, 1.

[12]

Michael Carolan. 2018. Smart farming techniques as political ontology: access, sovereignty and the performance of neoliberal and not'so?neoliberal worlds. Sociologia ruralis 58, no. 4, 745--764.

[13]

Craig R. Carter. 2008. Knowledge production and knowledge transfer: closing the research-practice gap. Journal of Supply Chain Management 44, no. 2, 78--83.

[14]

Nazli Cila. 2022. Designing Human-Agent Collaborations: Commitment, responsiveness, and support. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '22). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 420, 1--18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517500

Digital Library

[15]

Nazli Cila, Cristina Zaga, and Maria Luce Lupetti. 2021. Learning from robotic artefacts: A quest for strong concepts in Human-Robot Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '21). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1356--1365. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462095

Digital Library

[16]

Lucas Colusso, Cynthia L. Bennett, Gary Hsieh, and Sean A. Munson. 2017. Translational Resources: Reducing the Gap Between Academic Research and HCI Practice. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 957--968. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064667

Digital Library

[17]

Lucas Colusso, Ridley Jones, Sean A. Munson, and Gary Hsieh. 2019. A Translational Science Model for HCI. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Paper 1, 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300231

Digital Library

[18]

Alma Leora Culén, Jorun Børsting, and William Gaver. 2020. Strategies for Annotating Portfolios: Mapping Designs for New Domains. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1633--1645. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395490

Digital Library

[19]

Peter Dalsgaard and Christian Dindler. 2014. Between theory and practice: bridging concepts in HCI research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1635--1644. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557342

Digital Library

[20]

Diana L. Deadrick and Pamela A. Gibson. 2007. An examination of the research--practice gap in HR: Comparing topics of interest to HR academics and HR professionals. Human Resource Management Review 17, 2, 131--139.

[21]

Audrey Desjardins and Cayla Key. 2020. Parallels, Tangents, and Loops: Reflections on the 'Through' Part of RtD. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '20). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2133--2147. https://doi.org/10.1145/3357236.3395586

Digital Library

[22]

Audrey Desjardins, Ron Wakkary, Will Odom, Henry Lin, and Markus Lorenz Schilling. 2017. Exploring DIY Tutorials As a Way to Disseminate Research Through Design. Interactions 24, 4 (June 2017), 78--82. https://doi.org/10.1145/3098319

Digital Library

[23]

Carl DiSalvo and Jonathan Lukens. 2011. Non-anthropocentrism and the non-human in design: Possibilities for designing new forms of engagement with and through technology. In M. Foth, L. Forlano, M. Gibbs, & C. Satchell (Eds.), From social butterfly to engaged citizen: urban informatics, social media, ubiquitous computing, and mobile technology to support citizen engagement (pp. 421--437). MIT Press.

[24]

Alan Dix, Janet E. Finlay, Gregory D. Abowd, and Russell Beale. 2003. Human-Computer Interaction (3rd Edition). Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.

[25]

Renate L. Doerfler, Christina Lehermeier, Heike Kliem, Erich Möstl, and Heinz Bernhardt. 2016. Physiological and behavioral responses of dairy cattle to the introduction of robot scrapers. Frontiers in veterinary science, 3, 106.

[26]

Judith Dörrenbächer, Diana Löffler, and Marc Hassenzahl. 2020. Becoming a Robot - Overcoming Anthropomorphism with Techno-Mimesis. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376507

Digital Library

[27]

Clemens Driessen and Leonie FM Heutinck. 2015. Cows desiring to be milked? Milking robots and the co-evolution of ethics and technology on Dutch dairy farms. Agriculture and Human Values 32, 3--20.

[28]

Callum R. Eastwood and Alan Renwick. 2020. Innovation uncertainty impacts the adoption of smarter farming approaches. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 4, 24.

[29]

Daniel Fallman and Erik Stolterman. 2010. Establishing criteria of rigour and relevance in interaction design research, Digital Creativity, 21:4, 265--272.

[30]

Luciano Floridi, Josh Cowls, Monica Beltrametti, Raja Chatila, Patrice Chazerand, Virginia Dignum, Christoph Luetge et al. 2021. An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Ethics, governance, and policies in artificial intelligence, 19--39.

[31]

Eduard Fosch-Villaronga and Jordi Albo-Canals. 2019. I'll take care of you," said the robot: Reflecting upon the Legal and Ethical Aspects of the Use and Development of Social Robots for Therapy. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics 10, 1, 77--93.

[32]

Ken Friedman. 2003. Theory construction in design research: criteria: approaches, and methods. Design Studies, 24, 507--522.

[33]

Bill Gaver and John Bowers. 2012. Annotated portfolios. interactions 19, 4 (July + August 2012), 40--49. https://doi.org/10.1145/2212877.2212889

Digital Library

[34]

Sabine Geldof and Joannes Vandermeulen. 2007. A Practitioner's View of Human--Computer Interaction Research and Practice. Artifact, 1(3), 134--141.

[35]

Bill Green. 2009. Introduction: Understanding and researching professional practice. In Green, B. (ed). Understanding and researching professional practice. Sense Publishers.

[36]

Elizabeth Goodman, Erik Stolterman, and Ron Wakkary. 2011. Understanding interaction design practices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2011), 1061. http://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979100

Digital Library

[37]

Colin M. Gray and Yubo Kou. 2017. UX Practitioners' Engagement with Intermediate-Level Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 13--17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064857.3079110

Digital Library

[38]

Colin M. Gray, Erik Stolterman, and Martin A. Siegel. 2014. Reprioritizing the relationship between HCI research and practice: bubble-up and trickle-down effects. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems (DIS '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 725--734. https://doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598595

Digital Library

[39]

Bjørn Gunnar Hansen. 2015. Robotic milking-farmer experiences and adoption rate in Jæren, Norway. Journal of Rural Studies 41, 109--117.

[40]

Peter Hodges, Stan Ruecker, Celso Scaletsky, Jaime Rivera, Roberto Faller, and Amanda Geppert. 2017. Four criteria for design theories. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation 3, 1, 65--74.

[41]

Guy Hoffman, Oren Zuckerman, Gilad Hirschberger, Michal Luria, and Tal Shani Sherman. 2015. Design and Evaluation of a Peripheral Robotic Conversation Companion. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI'15). Portland, USA, 3--10.

Digital Library

[42]

Kristina Höök and Jonas Löwgren. 2012. Strong Concepts: Intermediate-level Knowledge in Interaction Design Research. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 19, 3, Article 23 (Oct. 2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2362364.2362371

Digital Library

[43]

Emma Jakku, Bruce Taylor, Aysha Fleming, Claire Mason, Simon Fielke, Chris Sounness, and Peter Thorburn. 2019. ?If they don't tell us what they do with it, why would we trust them?" Trust, transparency and benefit-sharing in Smart Farming." NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 90, 100285.

[44]

Siddarth Jain and Brenna Argall. 2019. Probabilistic Human Intent Recognition for Shared Autonomy in Assistive Robotics. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 9, 1, Article 2 (December 2019).

Digital Library

[45]

Malte Jung and Pamela Hinds. 2018. Robots in the Wild: A Time for More Robust Theories of Human-Robot Interaction. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 7, 1, Article 2 (May 2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3208975

Digital Library

[46]

Peter H. Kahn, Nathan G. Freier, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, Jolina H. Ruckert, Rachel L. Severson, and Shaun K. Kane. 2008. Design patterns for sociality in human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction (HRI '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 97--104. https://doi.org/10.1145/1349822.1349836

Digital Library

[47]

Alexandra Kapeller, Heike Felzmann, Eduard Fosch-Villaronga, Kostas Nizamis, and Ann-Marie Hughes. 2021. Implementing ethical, legal, and societal considerations in wearable robot design. Applied Sciences 11, 15, 6705.

[48]

Elizabeth Kim, Rhea Paul, Frederick Shic, and Brian Scassellati. 2012. Bridging the Research Gap: Making HRI Useful to Individuals with Autism. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 1.1, 26--54.

Digital Library

[49]

Tobias Kopp, Marco Baumgartner, and Steffen Kinkel. 2021. Success factors for introducing industrial human-robot interaction in practice: an empirically driven framework. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 112, 685--704.

[50]

Nicole C. Krämer, Sabrina Eimler, Astrid Von Der Pütten, and Sabine Payr. 2011. Theory of companions: what can theoretical models contribute to applications and understanding of human-robot interaction?. Applied Artificial Intelligence 25, 6, 474--502.

Digital Library

[51]

Min Kyung Lee, Sara Kiesler, Jodi Forlizzi, Siddhartha Srinivasa, and Paul Rybski. 2010. Gracefully mitigating breakdowns in robotic services. In 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 203--210.

Digital Library

[52]

Ronald Leenes, Erica Palmerini, Bert-Jaap Koops, Andrea Bertolini, Pericle Salvini and Federica Lucivero. 2017. Regulatory challenges of robotics: some guidelines for addressing legal and ethical issues. Law, Innovation and Technology, 9:1, 1--44.

[53]

Jonas Löwgren. 2009. Toward an articulation of interaction esthetics. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 15, 2, 129--146.

Digital Library

[54]

Jonas Löwgren. 2013. Annotated portfolios and other forms of intermediate- level knowledge. interactions 20, 1 (January + February 2013), 30--34.

Digital Library

[55]

Christina Lundström and Jessica Lindblom. 2021. Care in dairy farming with automatic milking systems, identified using an Activity Theory lens. Journal of Rural Studies 87, 386--403.

[56]

Maria Luce Lupetti, Cristina Zaga, and Nazli Cila. 2021. Designerly Ways of Knowing in HRI: Broadening the Scope of Design-oriented HRI Through the Concept of Intermediate-level Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI '21). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 389--398. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434073.3444668

Digital Library

[57]

Michal Luria, Marius Hoggenmüller, Wen-Ying Lee, Luke Hespanhol, Malte Jung, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2021. Research through Design Approaches in Human-Robot Interaction. In Companion of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI '21 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 685--687. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434074.3444868

Digital Library

[58]

Ayoola Makinde, Muhammad Muhaiminul Islam, and Stacey D. Scott. 2020. Opportunities for ACI in PLF: Applying Animal- and User-Centred Design to Precision Livestock Farming. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Animal-Computer Interaction (ACI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 13, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3371049.3371055

Digital Library

[59]

Maja Matari. 2018. On relevance: Balancing theory and practice in HRI. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI) 7, 1, 1--2.

Digital Library

[60]

Christopher Miles. 2019. The combine will tell the truth: On precision agriculture and algorithmic rationality. Big Data & Society 6, 1, 2053951719849444.

[61]

António B. Moniz and Bettina-Johanna Krings. 2016. Robots Working with Humans or Humans Working with Robots? Searching for Social Dimensions in New Human-Robot Interaction in Industry. Societies 6, 3, 23.

[62]

Bilge Mutlu. 2021. The virtual and the physical: two frames of mind. Iscience, 24, 2.

[63]

Donald A. Norman. 2010. The Research-practice Gap: The Need for Translational Developers. Interactions 17, 4 (July 2010), 9--12.

Digital Library

[64]

William Odom, Tom Jenkins, Kristina Andersen, Bill Gaver, James Pierce, Anna Vallgårda, Andy Boucher, David Chatting, Janne van Kollenburg, and Kevin Lefeuvre. 2017. Crafting a Place for Attending to the Things of Design at CHI. Interactions 25, 1 (Dec. 2017), 52--57.

Digital Library

[65]

Anastasia K. Ostrowski, Cynthia Breazeal and Hae Won Park. 2021. Long-Term Co-Design Guidelines: Empowering Older Adults as Co-Designers of Social Robots, 2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2021, pp. 1165--1172.

Digital Library

[66]

Malak Qbilat, Ana Iglesias, and Tony Belpaeme. 2021. A proposal of accessibility guidelines for human-robot interaction. Electronics, 10, 5, 561.

[67]

Christian Remy, Silke Gegenbauer, and Elaine M. Huang. 2015. Bridging the Theory-Practice Gap: Lessons and Challenges of Applying the Attachment Framework for Sustainable HCI Design. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1305--1314. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702567

Digital Library

[68]

Sara L Rynes. 2012. The research-practice gap in I/O psychology and related fields: Challenges and potential solutions. The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology, 1, 409--452.

[69]

Kelly Rijswijk, Laurens Klerkx, Manlio Bacco, Fabio Bartolini, Ellen Bulten, Lies Debruyne, Joost Dessein, Ivano Scotti, and Gianluca Brunori. 2021. Digital transformation of agriculture and rural areas: A socio-cyber-physical system framework to support responsibilisation. Journal of Rural Studies, 85, 79--90.

[70]

Jack Rodenburg. 2017. Robotic milking: Technology, farm design, and effects on work flow. Journal of Dairy Science 100, 9, 7729--7738.

[71]

David J. Roedl and Erik Stolterman. 2013. Design Research at CHI and Its Applicability to Design Practice. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1951--1954.

Digital Library

[72]

Corina Sas, Steve Whittaker, Steven Dow, Jodi Forlizzi, and John Zimmerman. 2014. Generating Implications for Design Through Design Research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1971--1980.

Digital Library

[73]

Bob R. Schadenberg, Dennis Reidsma, Dirk K. J. Heylen, and Vanessa Evers. 2021. ?I See What You Did There": Understanding People's Social Perception of a Robot and Its Predictability. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 10, 3, Article 28 (September 2021).

Digital Library

[74]

Donald A. Schön. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books

[75]

Vasant Srinivasan and Leila Takayama. 2016. Help Me Please: Robot Politeness Strategies for Soliciting Help From Humans. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4945--4955.

Digital Library

[76]

Erik Stolterman. 2008. The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design 2, 1.

[77]

Erik Stolterman and Mikael Wiberg. 2010. Concept-driven interaction design research. Human--Computer Interaction 25, 2, 95--118.

[78]

Egil Petter Stræte, Jostein Vik, and Bjørn Gunnar Hansen. 2017. The social robot: a study of the social and political aspects of automatic milking systems. In Proceedings in System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks, 2202--33.

[79]

Lisa Tambornino, Dirk Lanzerath, Rowena Rodrigues, and David Wright. 2018. D4. 3: Survey of REC approaches and codes for Artificial Intelligence & Robotics.

[80]

Sam Thellman and Tom Ziemke. 2021. The Perceptual Belief Problem: Why Explainability Is a Tough Challenge in Social Robotics. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 10, 3, Article 29 (September 2021).

Digital Library

[81]

J. Gregory Trafton, Paula Raymond, and Sangeet Khemlani. 2021. The Power of Theory. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 10, 1, Article 11 (March 2021), 3 pages.

Digital Library

[82]

Rik van den Brule, Gijsbert Bijlstra, Ron Dotsch, Pim Haselager, and Daniël H. J. Wigboldus. 2016. Warning signals for poor performance improve human-robot interaction. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 5, 2 (September 2016), 69--89.

Digital Library

[83]

Simone van der Burg, Marc-Jeroen Bogaardt and Sjaak Wolfert. 2019 Ethics of smart farming: Current questions and directions for responsible innovation towards the future. NJAS: Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 90--91, 1, 1--10.

[84]

Juan P. Vasconez, George A. Kantor, and Fernando A. Auat Cheein. 2019. Human--robot interaction in agriculture: A survey and current challenges. Biosystems engineering 179, 35--48.

[85]

Louise Veling and Conor McGinn. 2021. Qualitative research in HRI: A review and taxonomy. International Journal of Social Robotics 13, 1689--1709.

[86]

Jostein Vik, Egil Petter Stræte, Bjørn Gunnar Hansen, and Torfinn Nærland. 2019. The political robot--The structural consequences of automated milking systems (AMS) in Norway. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 90, 100305.

[87]

Tian-Miao Wang, Yong Tao, and Hui Liu. 2018. Current researches and future development trend of intelligent robot: A review. Int. J. of Automation and Computing 15, 5, 525--546.

Digital Library

[88]

Steve Whittaker, Yvonne Rogers, Elena Petrovskaya, and Hongbin Zhuang. 2021. Designing Personas for Expressive Robots: Personality in the New Breed of Moving, Speaking, and Colorful Social Home Robots. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 10, 1, Article 8 (March 2021), 25 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3424153

Digital Library

[89]

Nur Yildirim, Mahima Pushkarna, Nitesh Goyal, Martin Wattenberg, and Fernanda Viégas. 2023. Investigating How Practitioners Use Human-AI Guidelines: A Case Study on the People + AI Guidebook. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '23). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 356, 1--13.

Digital Library

[90]

John Zimmerman, Erik Stolterman, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2010. An analysis and critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 310--319.

Digital Library

Cited By

Rozendaal MVroon JBleeker M(2024)Enacting Human-Robot Encounters with Theater Professionals on a Mixed Reality StageACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3678186Online publication date: 17-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678186
Diab MDemiris Y(2024)A framework for trust-related knowledge transfer in human–robot interactionAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-024-09653-w38:1Online publication date: 29-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10458-024-09653-w

Index Terms

Bridging HRI Theory and Practice: Design Guidelines for Robot Communication in Dairy Farming
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Interaction design
    1. Interaction design theory, concepts and paradigms

Recommendations

Designerly Ways of Knowing in HRI: Broadening the Scope of Design-oriented HRI Through the Concept of Intermediate-level Knowledge
HRI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Interest in design methods and tools has been steadily growing in HRI. Yet, design is not acknowledged as a discipline with specific epistemology and methodology. Designerly HRI work is validated through user studies which, we argue, provide a limited ...
2nd International Workshop on Designerly HRI Knowledge. Reflecting on HRI practices through Annotated Portfolios of Robotic Artefacts
HRI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

We propose a workshop stemming from ongoing conversations about the role of design methods and designed artefacts within the field of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). Given the growing interest in understanding what the field can learn from design ...
Bridging Work Practice and System Design: Integrating Systemic Analysis, Appreciative Intervention and Practitioner Participation

This article discusses the integration of work practice and system design. By scrutinising the unfolding discourse of workshop participants the co-construction of work practice issues as relevant design considerations is described. Through a mutual ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

HRI '24: Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 2024

982 pages

ISBN:9798400703225

DOI:10.1145/3610977

General Chairs:
Dan Grollman
Plus One Robotics, USA
,
Elizabeth Broadbent
University of Auckland, New Zealand
,
Program Chairs:
Wendy Ju
Cornell Tech, USA
,
Harold Soh
National University of Singapore, Singapore
,
Tom Williams
Colorado School of Mines, USA

Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.

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

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 March 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

HRI '24

Sponsor:

HRI '24: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 11 - 15, 2024

CO, Boulder, USA

Acceptance Rates

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

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
496
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)496
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)83

Reflects downloads up to 21 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Rozendaal MVroon JBleeker M(2024)Enacting Human-Robot Encounters with Theater Professionals on a Mixed Reality StageACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3678186Online publication date: 17-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678186
Diab MDemiris Y(2024)A framework for trust-related knowledge transfer in human–robot interactionAutonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems10.1007/s10458-024-09653-w38:1Online publication date: 29-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10458-024-09653-w

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

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