团队中的陌生人?:与陌生人或个人相比,人类同伴更有可能拒绝机器人队友

IF 3.8 2区 计算机科学 Q2 ROBOTICS
Cobe Deane Wilson, Danielle Langlois, Marlena R. Fraune
{"title":"团队中的陌生人?:与陌生人或个人相比,人类同伴更有可能拒绝机器人队友","authors":"Cobe Deane Wilson, Danielle Langlois, Marlena R. Fraune","doi":"10.1007/s12369-024-01133-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>As robots become more common, people interact with them individually, with strangers, and with friends. For example, when coming across a robot in a mall, a family might ask it for instructions. An individual person might hesitate to interact with the robot until they see another person interacting, and then explore the robot together. Although human–robot interaction (HRI) research has recently uncovered the importance of examining differences in group behavior toward robots versus individuals’ behavior, thus far, most HRI research has not distinguished behavior based on group type (e.g., stranger, companion). In this online lab-based study, we explore how individuals, strangers, and companions collaborate with robot teammates. We test competing hypotheses: (1) More cohesive companion groups will form a <i>human subgroup</i> and exclude the robots more than strangers or individuals, vs. (2) More cohesive companion groups will provide <i>social support</i> to interact better with the novel robotic technology than strangers or individuals. In this cooperative context in which participants were required to interact with the robot, results supported H1: the subgroup hypothesis. Based on these findings, people deploying robots should note that if people are required to interact with the robots, the interactions may not go as smoothly for companion groups compared to stranger groups or individuals.</p>","PeriodicalId":14361,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Robotics","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strangers on a Team?: Human Companions, Compared to Strangers or Individuals, are More Likely to Reject a Robot Teammate\",\"authors\":\"Cobe Deane Wilson, Danielle Langlois, Marlena R. Fraune\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12369-024-01133-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>As robots become more common, people interact with them individually, with strangers, and with friends. For example, when coming across a robot in a mall, a family might ask it for instructions. An individual person might hesitate to interact with the robot until they see another person interacting, and then explore the robot together. Although human–robot interaction (HRI) research has recently uncovered the importance of examining differences in group behavior toward robots versus individuals’ behavior, thus far, most HRI research has not distinguished behavior based on group type (e.g., stranger, companion). In this online lab-based study, we explore how individuals, strangers, and companions collaborate with robot teammates. We test competing hypotheses: (1) More cohesive companion groups will form a <i>human subgroup</i> and exclude the robots more than strangers or individuals, vs. (2) More cohesive companion groups will provide <i>social support</i> to interact better with the novel robotic technology than strangers or individuals. In this cooperative context in which participants were required to interact with the robot, results supported H1: the subgroup hypothesis. Based on these findings, people deploying robots should note that if people are required to interact with the robots, the interactions may not go as smoothly for companion groups compared to stranger groups or individuals.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01133-1\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ROBOTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Robotics","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01133-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ROBOTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着机器人越来越常见,人们会与它们单独、与陌生人、与朋友进行互动。例如,在商场里遇到一个机器人时,一家人可能会向它请教。单个人可能会犹豫是否要与机器人互动,直到他们看到其他人在互动,然后一起探索机器人。尽管最近的人机交互(HRI)研究发现,研究对机器人的群体行为与个人行为之间的差异非常重要,但迄今为止,大多数 HRI 研究都没有根据群体类型(如陌生人、同伴)来区分行为。在这项基于实验室的在线研究中,我们探讨了个人、陌生人和同伴如何与机器人队友协作。我们测试了两个相互竞争的假设:(1) 与陌生人或个人相比,凝聚力更强的同伴群体将形成一个人类子群体,并更排斥机器人;(2) 与陌生人或个人相比,凝聚力更强的同伴群体将提供社会支持,从而更好地与新型机器人技术互动。在这种要求参与者与机器人互动的合作情境中,结果支持 H1:亚群体假设。基于这些研究结果,人们在部署机器人时应注意,如果要求人们与机器人互动,那么同伴群体与陌生人群体或个人的互动可能不会那么顺利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Strangers on a Team?: Human Companions, Compared to Strangers or Individuals, are More Likely to Reject a Robot Teammate

Strangers on a Team?: Human Companions, Compared to Strangers or Individuals, are More Likely to Reject a Robot Teammate

As robots become more common, people interact with them individually, with strangers, and with friends. For example, when coming across a robot in a mall, a family might ask it for instructions. An individual person might hesitate to interact with the robot until they see another person interacting, and then explore the robot together. Although human–robot interaction (HRI) research has recently uncovered the importance of examining differences in group behavior toward robots versus individuals’ behavior, thus far, most HRI research has not distinguished behavior based on group type (e.g., stranger, companion). In this online lab-based study, we explore how individuals, strangers, and companions collaborate with robot teammates. We test competing hypotheses: (1) More cohesive companion groups will form a human subgroup and exclude the robots more than strangers or individuals, vs. (2) More cohesive companion groups will provide social support to interact better with the novel robotic technology than strangers or individuals. In this cooperative context in which participants were required to interact with the robot, results supported H1: the subgroup hypothesis. Based on these findings, people deploying robots should note that if people are required to interact with the robots, the interactions may not go as smoothly for companion groups compared to stranger groups or individuals.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Social Robotics is the study of robots that are able to interact and communicate among themselves, with humans, and with the environment, within the social and cultural structure attached to its role. The journal covers a broad spectrum of topics related to the latest technologies, new research results and developments in the area of social robotics on all levels, from developments in core enabling technologies to system integration, aesthetic design, applications and social implications. It provides a platform for like-minded researchers to present their findings and latest developments in social robotics, covering relevant advances in engineering, computing, arts and social sciences. The journal publishes original, peer reviewed articles and contributions on innovative ideas and concepts, new discoveries and improvements, as well as novel applications, by leading researchers and developers regarding the latest fundamental advances in the core technologies that form the backbone of social robotics, distinguished developmental projects in the area, as well as seminal works in aesthetic design, ethics and philosophy, studies on social impact and influence, pertaining to social robotics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信