Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-65tv2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-15T03:45:59.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I am a warm robot: the effects of temperature in physical human–robot interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2013

Eunil Park  and
Jaeryoung Lee
Eunil Park*
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Innovation and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), Daejeon, Republic of Korea
Jaeryoung Lee
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: pa1324@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

What factors affect users' perceptions of physical human–robot interactions? To answer this question, this study examined whether the skin temperature of a social robot affected users' perceptions of the robot during physical interaction. Results from a between-subjects experiment (warm, intermediate, cool, or no interaction) with a dinosaur robot demonstrated that skin temperature significantly affects users' perceptions and evaluations of a socially interactive robot. Additionally, this study found that social presence had partial mediating effects on several dependent variables. Important implications and limitations for improving human–robot interactions are discussed here.

Keywords

Human–robot interactionSocial robotPhysical interactionSocial presenceSkin temperature

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , January 2014 , pp. 133 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Allen, K. M., Blascovich, J., Tomaka, J. and Kelsey, R.M., “Presence of human friends and pet dogs as moderators of autonomic responses to stress in women,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 61, 582–589 (1991).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Baron, R. M. and Kenny, D. A., “The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51, 1173–1182 (1986).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Bartneck, C., Croft, E. and Kulic, D., “Measuring the Anthropomorphism, Animacy, Likeability, Perceived Intelligence and Perceived Safety of Robots,” Proceedings of the Metrics for Human-Robot Interaction Workshop in affiliation with the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Technical Report 471, University of Hertfordshire, Amsterdam (2008) pp. 37–41. Available at: https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~dkulic/pubs/bartneckKulicCroft.pdf.Google Scholar
4.Bush, E., “The use of human touch to improve the well-being of older adults,” J. Holistic Nurs. 19, 256–270 (2001).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Cabibihan, J. J., Pattofatto, S., Jomaa, M., Benallal, A. and Carrozza, M. C., “Towards humanlike social touch for sociable robotics and prosthetics: Comparisons on the compliance, conformance and hysteresis of synthetic and human fingertip skins,” Int. J. Soc. Robot. 1, 29–40 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Chaturvedi, M. and Chander, R., “Development of emotional stability scale,” Ind. Psychiatry J. 19, 37–40 (2010).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Cho, K. and Shin, C., “Caregiving Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders using an Animal Robot,” Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (ACM, New York, 2011) pp. 399–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Cunningham, M.R., “Weather, mood, and helping behavior: Quasi experiments with the sunshine samaritan,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37, 1947–1956 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Davis, M., Robinsa, B., Dautenhahn, K., Nehaniv, C. and Powell, S., “A Comparison of Interactive and Robotic Systems in Therapy and Education for Children with Autism,” Proceeding of the Assistive Technology from Virtuality to Reality—8th European Conference for the Advancement of Assistive Technology in Europe AAATE05, Lille, France (2005).Google Scholar
10.Dubner, R., Sharav, Y., Gracely, R. H. and Price, D. D., “Idiopathic trigeminal neuralgia: Sensory features and pain mechanisms,” Pain 31, 23–33 (1987).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Dyck, P. J., Zimmerman, I. R., O'Brien, P. C., Ness, A., Caskey, P. E., Karnes, J. and Bushek, W., “Introduction of automated systems to evaluate touch-pressure, vibration, and thermal cutaneous sensation in man,” Ann. Neurol. 4, 502–510 (1978).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Fisher, J. D., Rytting, M. and Heslin, R., “Hands touching hands: Affective and evaluative effects of an interpersonal touch,” Sociometry 39, 416–421 (1976).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Ford, C. W., Compassionate Touch: The Role of Human Touch in Healing and Recovery (Simon & Schuster, New York, 1993).Google Scholar
14.Gibson, J. J., “Observations on active touch,” Psychol. Rev. 69, 477–491 (1962).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Goetz, J., Kiesler, S. and Powers, A., “Matching Robot Appearance and Behavior to Tasks to Improve Human-robot Cooperation,” Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (IEEE, New York, NY: 2003) pp. 55–60.Google Scholar
16.Gray, P. B. and Young, S. M., “Human-pet dynamics in cross-cultural perspective,” Anthrozoos: Multidiscip. J. Interact. 24, 17–30, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Griffitt, W., “Environmental effects on interpersonal affective behavior: Ambient effective temperature and attraction,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 15, 240–244 (1970).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Griffitt, W. and Veitch, R., “Hot and crowded: Influence of population density and temperature on interpersonal affective behavior,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 17, 92–98 (1971).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Groom, V., Chen, J., Johnson, T., Kara, F. A. and Nass, C., “Critic, Compatriot, or Chump Re-sponses to Robot Blame Attribution,” Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (ACM, New York, 2010) pp. 211–217.Google Scholar
20.Hassanein, K. and Head, M., “The impact of infusing social presence in the web interface: An investigation across product types,” Int. J. Electron. Commer. 10, 31–55 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Heerink, M., Krose, B., Evers, V. and Wielinga, B., “The influence of social presence on acceptance of a companion robot by older people,” J. Phys. Agents 2, 33–40 (2008).Google Scholar
22.Hinds, P. J., Roberts, T. L. and Jones, H., “Whose job is it anyway? A study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task,” Hum.-Comput. Interact. 42, 151–181 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Jin, S. A. A., “Modality effects in second life: The mediating role of social presence and the moderating role of product involvement,” Cyberpsychol. Behav. 12, 717–721 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Kaneko, K., Harada, K. and Kanehiro, F., “Development of Multi-fingered Hand for Life-size Humanoid Robots,” Proceedings of 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (IEEE, New York, 2007) pp. 913–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Kenny, D. A., “Reflections on mediation,” Organ. Res. Methods 11, 353–358 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Kim, K. J., Sundar, S. S. and Park, E., “Caregiving role in human-robot interaction: A study of the mediating effects of perceived benefit and social presence,” Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 1799–1806 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Kolb, P., Gockel, C. and Werth, L., “The effects of temperature on service employees' customer orientation: An experimental approach,” Ergon. 55, 621–635 (2012).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Komatsu, T. and Uchiyama, K., “Dexterous anthropomorphic robot hand with distributed tactile sensor: Gifu hand II,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 7, 296–303 (2002).Google Scholar
29.Lee, K. M., Peng, W., Jin, S. and Yan, C., “Can robots manifest personality?: An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in humanrobot interaction,” J. Commun. 56, 754–772 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Lee, K. M., Jung, Y., Kim, J. and Kim, S. R. “Are physically embodied social agents better than disembodied social agents?: The effects of physical embodiment, tactile interaction, and people's loneliness in human–robot interaction,” Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 64, 962–973 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Lee, J., Takehashi, H., Nagai, C. and Obinata, G., “Design of a Therapeutic Robot for Interacting with Autistic Children through Interpersonal Touch,” Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (IEEE, Paris, France, 2012) pp. 712–717.Google Scholar
32.Lombard, M. and Ditton, T., “At the heart of it all: The concept of presence,” J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 3, Available: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083–6101.1997.tb00072.x/full. Accessed 2012 April 7 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Lovchik, C. S. and Diftler, M. A., “The Robonaut Hand: A Dexterous Robot Hand for Space,” Proceedings of 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (IEEE, New York, 1999) pp. 907–912.Google Scholar
34.Nass, C., Fogg, B. J. and Moon, Y., “Can computers be teammates?,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 45, 669–678 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35.Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., Reeves, B. and C, C. Dryer, “Can Computer Personalities be Human Personalities?,” Proceedings of the International Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems (ACM, New York, 1995) pp. 228–229.Google Scholar
36.Nie, J., Pak, M., Marin, A. L. and Sundar, S. S., “Can you Hold my Hand?: Physical Warmth in Human-robot Interaction,” Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (ACM, New York, 2012) pp. 201–202.Google Scholar
37.Park, E. and del Pobil, A. P., “The Effects of Emotions on Psychology of People,” Int. Handb. Acad. Res. Teach. 21, 142–145 (2012).Google Scholar
38.Park, E. and Kim, K. J., “User acceptance of Long-Term Evolution (LTE) services: An application of extended technology acceptance model,” Program: Elect. Libr. Inf. Syst. 47, 188–205 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39.Park, E., Kong, H., Lim, H., Lee, J., You, S. and del Pobil, A. P., “The Effect of Robot's Behavior vs. Appearance on Communication with Humans,” Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (ACM, New York, 2011) pp. 219–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40.Serpell, J., “Beneficial effects of pet ownership on some aspects of human health and behaviour,” J. R. Soc. Med. 84, 717–720 (1991).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41.Shin, D. and Choo, H., “Modeling the acceptance of socially interactive robotics: Social presence in human-robot interaction,” Interact. Stud. 12, 430–460 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Shotsberger, P., “The human touch: Synchronous communication in web-based learning,” Educ. Technol. 40, 53–56 (2000).Google Scholar