![]()
by
Adriana Hamacher
Research & Innovation
News
August 19, 2016
Making an assistive robot partner expressive and communicative is likely to make it more satisfying to work with and lead to users trusting it more, even if it makes mistakes, a new study suggests.
But the research also shows that giving robots human-like traits could have a flip side – users may even lie to the robot in order to avoid hurting its feelings.
These were the main findings of the study I undertook as part of my MSc in Human Computer Interaction at University College London (UCL), with the objective of designing robotic assistants that people can trust. I’m presenting the research at the IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) later this month.
With the help of my supervisors, Professors Nadia Berthouze at UCL and Kerstin Eder at the University of Bristol, I constructed an experiment with a humanoid assistive robot helping users to make an omelette. The robot was tasked with passing the eggs, salt and oil but dropped one of the polystyrene eggs in two of the conditions and then attempted to make amends.
The aim was to investigate how a robot may recover a users’ trust when it makes a mistake and how it can communicate its erroneous behaviour to somebody who is working with it, either at home or at work.
The somewhat surprising result suggests that a communicative, expressive robot is preferable for the majority of users to a more efficient, less error prone one, despite it taking 50 per cent longer to complete the task.
Users reacted well to an apology from the robot that was able to communicate, and were particularly receptive to its sad facial expression which is likely to have reassured them that it ‘knew’ it had made a mistake.
At the end of the interaction, the communicative robot was programmed to ask participants whether they would give it the job of kitchen assistant, but they could only answer yes or no and were unable to qualify their answers.
Some were reluctant to answer and most appeared very uncomfortable. One person was under the impression that the robot looked sad when he said ‘no’, when it had not been programmed to appear so. Another complained of emotional blackmail and a third went as far as to lie to the robot.
Their reactions would suggest that, having seen the robot display human-like emotion when the egg dropped, many participants were now pre-conditioned to expect a similar reaction and therefore hesitated to say no; they were mindful of the possibility of a display of further human-like distress.
The research underlines that human-like attributes, such as regret, can be powerful tools in negating dissatisfaction but we must identify with care which specific traits we want to focus on and replicate. If there are no ground rules then we may end up with robots with different personalities, just like the people designing them.
“Trust in our counterparts is fundamental for successful interaction, says Kerstin Eder, who leads the Verification and Validation for Safety in Robots research theme at the Bristol Robotics Laboratory. “This study gives key insights into how communication and emotional expressions from robots can mitigate the impact of unexpected behaviour in collaborative robotics. Complementing thorough verification and validation with sound understanding of these human factors will help engineers design robotic assistants that people can trust.”
The study was aligned with the EPSRC funded project Trustworthy Robotic Assistants, where new verification and validation techniques are being developed to ensure safety and trustworthiness of the machines that will enhance our quality of life in the future.
The IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), takes place from 26 to 31 August in New York City, and the study – Believing in BERT: Using expressive communication to enhance trust and counteract operational error in physical Human-Robot Interaction’ by Adriana Hamacher, Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze, Anthony G. Pipe and Kerstin Eder – will be published by the IEEE as part of the conference proceedings, available via the IEEE Xplore Digital Library.
A pre-publication copy of the research paper is available at: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1605.08817.pdf
Adriana Hamacher Associate Editor at Robohub and the UK's Knowledge Transfer Network and a contributor to Economist Insights.. read more
assistive robots HRI humanoid
Research & Innovation
Business & Finance
Health & Medicine
Politics, Law & Society
Arts & Entertainment
Education & DIY
Events
Military & Defense
Exploration & Mining
Mapping & Surveillance
Enviro. & Agriculture
Aerial
Automotive
Industrial Automation
Consumer & Household
Space
latest posts popular reported elsewhere
Natural scale caterpillar soft robot is powered and controlled with light
by
Robohub Editors
Artificial intelligence could transform healthcare, but we need to accept it first
by
Owen A Johnson
As Ford sets a date, Jibo retracts theirs
by
Frank Tobe
NASA Space Robotics Challenge prepares robots for the journey to Mars
by
Robohub Editors
Midea’s masterplan to become China’s robot powerhouse
by
Frank Tobe
50 different state regulations for robocars is not a bad idea
by
Brad Templeton, Robocars.com
Living with a prosthesis that learns: A case-study in translational medicine
by
Claudio Castellini, Frontiers in Neurorobotics
Talking Machines: Generative art and Hamiltonian Monte Carlo, with Doug Eck
by
Talking Machines
IDC awards 5 warehouse robotics innovators
by
Frank Tobe
Robohub roundtable: Why do robotics crowdfunding projects fail?
by
Robohub Editors
latest posts popular reported elsewhere
Designing our home service robot from the ground upRobohub roundtable: Why do robotics crowdfunding projects fail?Exoskeletons: From helping people walk to controlling robots in spaceSweep: a low cost LiDAR sensor for smart consumer productsNAO Next Gen now available for a wider audienceROS 101: Intro to the Robot Operating SystemBiohybrid robots built from living tissue start to take shapeWhite House economic report looks to robotics for the futureSurvey: Evaluate ethics of health related privacy with care robotsHow do self-driving cars work?
latest posts popular reported elsewhere
People favour expressive, communicative robots over efficient and effective ones
Aging Danes Hope Robots Will Save Their Welfare State
NASA’s asteroid redirect mission completes robotic design milestone
Man With Cerebral Palsy Walks For The First Time, Thanks To Robotic Skeleton Device
Uber Debuts Its First Fleet of Driverless Cars in Pittsburgh
Robotics Can Get Girls Into STEM, but Some Still Need Convincing
China’s Factories Count on Robots as Workforce Shrinks
Ford Promises Fleets of Driverless Cars Within Five Years
Toyota funds A.I., robotics research at Michigan campus
How Rethink Robotics Sees The Future Of Collaborative Robots
Can Singapore’s labor crunch spark a robot revolution?
How agribusiness can avoid the mistakes of clean tech | SSIR
Di-Wheel Concept | Australian Centre for Field Robotics
Uh-oh! Crowdfunded social robot Jibo won’t now ship outside North America
Think Amazon’s Drone Delivery Idea Is a Gimmick? Think Again
Latest to Quit Google’s Self-Driving Car Unit: Top Roboticist
Prospector-1—first commercial interplanetary mining mission
Robotic gait training for kids with CP – it’s cool but does it work? – Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine – University of Alberta
How will robots shape our future? (infographic)
The Washington Post will use robots to write stories about the Rio Olympics
Ekso Bionics
July 26, 2014
A dedicated jobs board for the global robotics community.
Robohub Science Communication Internship - RobohubSenior Researcher in UAV Communications and Coordination - Lakeside Labs GmbHSenior Research Engineer - ConSol PartnersLead Mechanical Engineer – Robotics - Sealed Air Corporation - Intellibot RoboticsElectrical Engineering Manager – Robotics - Sealed Air Corporation - Intellibot Robotics
