Differences in Social Expectations About Robot Signals and Human Signals

Cognitive Science 47 (12):e13393 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In our daily lives, we are continually involved in decision-making situations, many of which take place in the context of social interaction. Despite the ubiquity of such situations, there remains a gap in our understanding of how decision-making unfolds in social contexts, and how communicative signals, such as social cues and feedback, impact the choices we make. Interestingly, there is a new social context to which humans are recently increasingly more frequently exposed—social interaction with not only other humans but also artificial agents, such as robots or avatars. Given these new technological developments, it is of great interest to address the question of whether—and in what way—social signals exhibited by non-human agents influence decision-making. The present study aimed to examine whether robot non-verbal communicative behavior has an effect on human decision-making. To this end, we implemented a two-alternative-choice task where participants were to guess which of two presented cups was covering a ball. This game was an adaptation of a “Shell Game.” A robot avatar acted as a game partner producing social cues and feedback. We manipulated robot's cues (pointing toward one of the cups) before the participant's decision and the robot's feedback (“thumb up” or no feedback) after the decision. We found that participants were slower (compared to other conditions) when cues were mostly invalid and the robot reacted positively to wins. We argue that this was due to the incongruence of the signals (cue vs. feedback), and thus violation of expectations. In sum, our findings show that incongruence in pre- and post-decision social signals from a robot significantly influences task performance, highlighting the importance of understanding expectations toward social robots for effective human–robot interactions.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,035

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Cooperative gazing behaviors in human multi-robot interaction.Tian Xu, Hui Zhang & Chen Yu - 2013 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 14 (3):390-418.
Robot feedback shapes the tutor’s presentation.Karola Pitsch, Anna-Lisa Vollmer & Manuel Mühlig - 2013 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 14 (2):268-296.
Interaction between human and robot.Pramila Agrawal, Changchun Liu & Nilanjan Sarkar - 2008 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 9 (2):230-257.
The role of social eye-gaze in children’s and adults’ ownership attributions to robotic agents in three cultures.Patricia Kanngiesser, Shoji Itakura, Yue Zhou, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro & Bruce Hood - 2015 - Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies / Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systemsinteraction Studies 16 (1):1-28.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-12-23

Downloads
15 (#1,232,833)

6 months
12 (#258,021)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?