Top

International Journal of Social Robotics

Published in:

22-02-2021

Perceptions of Agent Loyalty with Ancillary Users

Authors: Samantha Reig, Elizabeth Jeanne Carter, Xiang Zhi Tan, Aaron Steinfeld, Jodi Forlizzi

Published in: International Journal of Social Robotics | Issue 8/2021

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Intelligent agents are part of the smartphones, smart speakers, and home robots that millions of us own and interact with regularly. However, little is known about if or how these agents should be embodied. Additionally, as conversations with agents move from heavily structured and transactional to more flexible and, at times, social, embodiment may play a more nuanced and variable role. This paper describes an experimental study that examined the effects of embodiment and quality of information on people’s perceptions of an intelligent agent. We conducted a \(3 \times 2\) between-subjects experiment in which participants completed an escape room-like task with the “help” of an artificial personal assistant that had a robotic embodiment, a virtual embodiment, or no embodiment. Participants were given either helpful or unhelpful information about the task. Findings suggest that people can attribute the quality of loyalty to an agent that belongs to someone else and may work on their behalf, and that in the context of a complex problem-solving situation that involves time pressure, people may prefer an embodied robot or a disembodied voice over a virtually embodied agent.

previous article Good Robots, Bad Robots: Morally Valenced Behavior Effects on Perceived Mind, Morality, and Trust

next article “Don’t Get Distracted!”: The Role of Social Robots’ Interaction Style on Users’ Cognitive Performance, Acceptance, and Non-Compliant Behavior

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

(2018) Incheon airport introduces “airstar”, passenger aiding robot. http://koreabizwire.com/incheon-airport-introduces-airstar-passenger-aiding-robot/121298. Accessed 05 Feb 2020

(2019) In the future, your room service will be delivered by a robot butler. http://www.thedailybeast.com/in-the-future-your-room-service-will-be-delivered-by-a-robot-butler. Accessed 05 Feb 2020

(2019) Mobile fact sheet. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/

(2020) Deploy the fleet: Food delivery at the university of pittsburgh goes to the robots. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2020/01/13/University-of-Pittsburgh-food-delivery-robots-Starship-munchies-higher-education-Sodexo-technology/stories/202001130099. Accessed 05 Feb 2020

Abdi H (2003) Factor rotations in factor analyses. Encyclopedia for research methods for the social sciences. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 792–795

Admoni H, Scassellati B (2017) Social eye gaze in human-robot interaction: a review. J Hum-Robot Interact 6(1):25–63. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.6.1.AdmoniCrossRef

Admoni H, Datsikas C, Scassellati B (2014) Speech and gaze conflicts in collaborative human–robot interactions. In: Proceedings of the annual meeting of the cognitive science society, vol 36

Admoni H, Weng T, Hayes B, Scassellati B (2016) Robot nonverbal behavior improves task performance in difficult collaborations. In: The Eleventh ACM/IEEE international conference on human robot interaction. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, HRI ’16, pp 51–58

Andrist S, Tan XZ, Gleicher M, Mutlu B (2014) Conversational gaze aversion for humanlike robots. In: 2014 9th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI). IEEE, pp 25–32

10.

Bell CR, Zemke RE (1987) Service breakdown: the road to recovery. Manag Rev 76(10):32

11.

Browne R (2020) Samsung unveils ‘ballie,’ a ball-shaped robot that rolls around your home. CNBC https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/07/samsung-unveils-ballie-robot-companion-at-ces-2020.html

12.

Carpinella CM, Wyman AB, Perez MA, Stroessner SJ (2017) The robotic social attributes scale (rosas): Development and validation. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, HRI ’17, pp 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020208

13.

Cassell J (2009) Getting by with a little help from your (virtual) friends. J Comput Sci Coll 25(1):7

14.

Cassell J, Bickmore T, Billinghurst M, Campbell L, Chang K, Vilhjálmsson H, Yan H (1999) Embodiment in conversational interfaces: Rea. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, CHI ’99, pp 520–527. https://doi.org/10.1145/302979.303150

15.

Cassell J, Sullivan J, Prevost S, Churchill EF (2000) Embodied conversational agents. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRef

16.

Coradeschi S, Loutfi A, Kristoffersson A, Cortellessa G, Severinson Eklundh K (2011) Social robotic telepresence. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’11, pp 5–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957660,

17.

Deng E, Mutlu B, Mataric MJ et al (2019) Embodiment in socially interactive robots. Found Trends Robot 7(4):251–356CrossRef

18.

Desai M (2007) Sliding scale autonomy and trust in human-robot interaction. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts. Lowell

19.

Desai M, Stubbs K, Steinfeld A, Yanco H (2009) Creating trustworthy robots: lessons and inspirations from automated systems. In: Proceedings of the AISB convention: new frontiers in human–robot interaction, pp 6–9

20.

Desai M, Medvedev M, Vázquez M, McSheehy S, Gadea-Omelchenko S, Bruggeman C, Steinfeld A, Yanco H (2012) Effects of changing reliability on trust of robot systems. In: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, pp 73–80

21.

Desai M, Kaniarasu P, Medvedev M, Steinfeld A, Yanco H (2013) Impact of robot failures and feedback on real-time trust. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. IEEE Press, Piscataway, HRI ’13, pp 251–258. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2447556.2447663

22.

Furr M (2011) Scale construction and psychometrics for social and personality psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd, LondonCrossRef

23.

Fussell SR, Kiesler S, Setlock LD, Yew V (2008) How people anthropomorphize robots. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on human robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’08, pp 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/1349822.1349842

24.

Gabrecht KM (2016) Human factors of semi-autonomous robots for urban search and rescue. Ph.D. thesis, University of Nottingham

25.

Gosling SD, Rentfrow PJ, Swann WB Jr (2003) A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. J Res Pers 37(6):504–528CrossRef

26.

Hoffman G, Forlizzi J, Ayal S, Steinfeld A, Antanitis J, Hochman G, Hochendoner E, Finkenaur J (2015) Robot presence and human honesty: Experimental evidence. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’15, pp 181–188. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696487

27.

Hoffmann L, Bock N, Rosenthal vd Pütten AM (2018) The peculiarities of robot embodiment (emcorp-scale): Development, validation and initial test of the embodiment and corporeality of artificial agents scale. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’18, pp 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171242

28.

Huang CM, Mutlu B (2013) The repertoire of robot behavior: enabling robots to achieve interaction goals through social behavior. J Hum-Robot Interact 2(2):80–102. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.2.2.HuangCrossRef

29.

Iio T, Satake S, Kanda T, Hayashi K, Ferreri F, Hagita N (2019) Human-like guide robot that proactively explains exhibits. Int J Soc Robot 12:1–18

30.

Jackson RB, Williams T (2019) On perceived social and moral agency in natural language capable robots. In: 2019 HRI workshop on the dark side of human-robot interaction. Jackson, RB, and Williams, pp 401–410

31.

Jian JY, Bisantz AM, Drury CG (2000) Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. Int J Cognit Ergonom 4(1):53–71CrossRef

32.

Jung MF, Lee JJ, DePalma N, Adalgeirsson SO, Hinds PJ, Breazeal C (2013) Engaging robots: easing complex human-robot teamwork using backchanneling. In: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work, pp 1555–1566

33.

Kahn PH Jr, Kanda T, Ishiguro H, Gill BT, Shen S, Gary HE, Ruckert JH (2015) Will people keep the secret of a humanoid robot?: Psychological intimacy in HRI. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’15, pp 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696486,

34.

Kanda T, Shiomi M, Miyashita Z, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2009) An affective guide robot in a shopping mall. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, pp 173–180

35.

Kiesler S, Powers A, Fussell SR, Torrey C (2008) Anthropomorphic interactions with a robot and robot-like agent. Soc Cognit 26(2):169–181CrossRef

36.

Lardinois F (2018) The google assistant is now bilingual. TechCrunch https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/30/the-google-assistant-is-now-bilingual/

37.

Lee D, Moon J, Kim YJ, Mun YY (2015) Antecedents and consequences of mobile phone usability: linking simplicity and interactivity to satisfaction, trust, and brand loyalty. Inf Manag 52(3):295–304CrossRef

38.

Lee MK, Forlizzi J (2009) Designing adaptive robotic services. In: Proceedings of IASDR’09

39.

Lee MK, Kielser S, Forlizzi J, Srinivasa S, Rybski P (2010) Gracefully mitigating breakdowns in robotic services. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, HRI ’10, pp 203–210,.http://dl.acm.org.proxy.library.cmu.edu/citation.cfm?id=1734454.1734544

40.

Leite I, Lehman JF (2016) The robot who knew too much: toward understanding the privacy/personalization trade-off in child-robot conversation. In: Proceedings of the the 15th international conference on interaction design and children. ACM, New York, NY, USA, IDC ’16, pp 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1145/2930674.2930687

41.

Li J (2015) The benefit of being physically present. Int J Hum-Comput Stud 77(C):23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2015.01.001CrossRef

42.

Litoiu A, Ullman D, Kim J, Scassellati B (2015) Evidence that robots trigger a cheating detector in humans. In: Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’15, pp 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1145/2696454.2696456,

43.

Luger E, Sellen A (2016) “Like having a really bad pa”: the gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, NY, USA, CHI ’16, pp 5286–5297. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858288,

44.

Luria M, Zheng R, Huffman B, Huang S, Forlizzi J, Zimmerman J (2020) Social boundaries for personal agents operating in interpersonal spaces. In: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI). ACM

45.

Muir BM (1989) Operators’ trust in and use of automatic controllers in a supervisory process control task. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

46.

Mutlu B, Forlizzi J (2008) Robots in organizations: the role of workflow, social, and environmental factors in human-robot interaction. In: 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction (HRI). IEEE, pp 287–294

47.

Mutlu B, Forlizzi J, Hodgins J (2006) A storytelling robot: modeling and evaluation of human-like gaze behavior. In: 2006 6th IEEE-RAS international conference on humanoid robots, pp 518–523. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICHR.2006.321322

48.

Niculae V, Kumar S, Boyd-Graber J, Danescu-Niculescu-Mizil C (2015) Linguistic harbingers of betrayal: a case study on an online strategy game. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.04744

49.

Oraby S (2017) Characterizing and modeling linguistic style in dialogue for intelligent social agents. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on intelligent user interfaces companion. ACM, New York, NY, USA, IUI ’17 Companion, pp 189–192. https://doi.org/10.1145/3030024.3038284

50.

Pan R, Lo H, Neustaedter C (2017) Collaboration, awareness, and communication in real-life escape rooms. In: Proceedings of the 2017 conference on designing interactive systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, DIS ’17, pp 1353–1364. https://doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064767

51.

Patterson H (1975) Maximum likelihood estimation of components of variance. In: Proceeding eight international biometric conference, 1975, Biometric Soc

52.

Perlmutter L, Fiannaca A, Kernfeld E, Anand S, Arnold L, Cakmak M (2016) Automatic adaptation of online language lessons for robot tutoring. In: International conference on social robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 660–670

53.

Powers A, Kiesler S, Fussell S, Torrey C (2007) Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’07, pp 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1145/1228716.1228736

54.

Reig S, Luria M, Wang JZ, Oltman D, Carter EJ, Steinfeld A, Forlizzi J, Zimmerman J (2020) Not some random agent: multi-person interaction with a personalizing service robot. In: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pp 289–297

55.

Ringberg T, Odekerken-Schröder G, Christensen GL (2007) A cultural models approach to service recovery. J Market 71(3):194–214 CrossRef

56.

Seymour W (2018) How loyal is your alexa?: Imagining a respectful smart assistant. In: Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, NY, USA, CHI EA ’18, pp SRC20:1–SRC20:6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3180289,

57.

Shakeri H, Singhal S, Pan R, Neustaedter C, Tang A (2017) Escaping together: the design and evaluation of a distributed real-life escape room. In: Proceedings of the annual symposium on computer-human interaction in play. ACM, New York, NY, USA, CHI PLAY ’17, pp 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1145/3116595.3116601

58.

Shim J, Arkin RC (2013) A taxonomy of robot deception and its benefits in HRI. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, pp 2328–2335. https://doi.org/10.1109/SMC.2013.398

59.

Short E, Hart J, Vu M, Scassellati B (2010) No fair!!: an interaction with a cheating robot. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, USA, HRI ’10, pp 219–226. http://dl.acm.org.proxy.library.cmu.edu/citation.cfm?id=1734454.1734546

60.

Steinfeld A (2011) Slightly subversive methods for promoting use of autonomy in robots. In: RSS workshop on human–robot interaction: perspectives and contributions to robotics from the human sciences

61.

Stoll B, Reig S, He L, Kaplan I, Jung MF, Fussell SR (2018) Wait, can you move the robot?: Examining telepresence robot use in collaborative teams. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’18, pp 14–22. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171243

62.

Stroup WW (2016) Generalized linear mixed models: modern concepts, methods and applications. CRC Press, CambridgeCrossRef

63.

Stuck RE, Hartley JQ, Mitzner TL, Beer JM, Rogers WA (2017) Understanding attitudes of adults aging with mobility impairments toward telepresence robots. In: Proceedings of the companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’17, pp 293–294. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038351

64.

Tuffley D (2008) Leadership of complex virtual teams. CSCW 2008 Workshop 9 Supporting Virtual Teamwork

65.

Vázquez M, May A, Steinfeld A, Chen WH (2011) A deceptive robot referee in a multiplayer gaming environment. In: 2011 international conference on collaboration technologies and systems (CTS), pp 204 – 211

66.

Wang B, Rau PLP (2018) Influence of embodiment and substrate of social robots on users decision-making and attitude. Int J Soc Robot 11:1–11

67.

Wijnen L, Coenen J, Grzyb B (2017) “It’s not my fault!”: Investigating the effects of the deceptive behaviour of a humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of the companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’17, pp 321–322. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038300

68.

Wu X, Thomas R, Drobina E, Mitzner T, Beer J (2017) An evaluation of a telepresence robot: User testing among older adults with mobility impairment. In: Proceedings of the companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction. ACM, New York, NY, USA, HRI ’17, pp 325–326. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038324

69.

Zhou M (2018) Amazon’s alexa is going to college. CNET https://www.cnet.com/news/amazons-alexa-is-going-to-college/

Title: Perceptions of Agent Loyalty with Ancillary Users
Authors: Samantha Reig
Elizabeth Jeanne Carter
Xiang Zhi Tan
Aaron Steinfeld
Jodi Forlizzi
Publication date: 22-02-2021
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: International Journal of Social Robotics / Issue 8/2021
Print ISSN: 1875-4791
Electronic ISSN: 1875-4805
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00725-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 8/2021

What Do You Mean by Trust? Establishing Shared Meaning in Interdisciplinary Design for Assistive Technology

Break the Ice: a Survey on Socially Aware Engagement for Human–Robot First Encounters

Space Invaders: Pedestrian Proxemic Utility Functions and Trust Zones for Autonomous Vehicle Interactions

A Bayesian Trust Inference Model for Human-Multi-Robot Teams

How Movements of a Non-Humanoid Robot Affect Emotional Perceptions and Trust

A Touching Connection: How Observing Robotic Touch Can Affect Human Trust in a Robot

Premium Partners