Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
International Journal of Social Robotics
Erschienen in: International Journal of Social Robotics 3/2013

01.08.2013

When a Robot’s Group Membership Matters

Anthropomorphization of Robots as a Function of Social Categorization

verfasst von: Dieta Kuchenbrandt, Friederike Eyssel, Simon Bobinger, Maria Neufeld

Erschienen in: International Journal of Social Robotics | Ausgabe 3/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Previous work has documented that humans categorize robots as members of different social groups, thereby using socially relevant cues such as a robot’s alleged gender or nationality. Importantly, these social categorization processes affect impressions people form about robots. In an experiment with N=45 participants, we utilized a minimal-group paradigm and tested whether categorizing the humanoid robot NAO as an in-group member vs. an out-group member based on socially non-relevant features would result in higher levels of anthropomorphism and more positive evaluations of the robot. Innovatively, to assess anthropomorphism, we utilized an implicit measurement procedure. Results support our hypotheses: Perceived in-group membership with the robot resulted in a greater extent of anthropomorphic inferences about the robot and more positive evaluations. Moreover, compared to the out-group condition, participants who perceived NAO as an in-group member showed greater willingness to interact with robots in general.
Vorheriger Artikel Living with a Vacuum Cleaning Robot

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

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!

Jetzt informieren

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!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Fußnoten
1
The original measure consisted of 10 items. However, four traits (hard-hearted, shallow, rude, cold) substantially reduced the reliability of the measure (α=.76) and thus were excluded from the overall index.
 
2
Before accumulating all RTs, some extreme, implausible long RTs (i.e., RTs up to 15774 ms) were detected that would have disproportionately boosted the overall RT mean and standard deviation. Therefore, RTs were z-transformed. Cases with standardized scores in excess of z=3.29 (RTs ranging between 2564 ms and 15774 ms; 1,8 %) were considered as an outlier and discarded from the data set. All reported data preparation and data analyses are based on the data set excluding these extreme values.
 
Literatur
1.
Eyssel F, Kuchenbrandt D (2012) Social categorization of social robots: antropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. Brit J Soc Psychol 51:724–731 CrossRef
2.
Eyssel F, Kuchenbrandt D, Bobinger S (2011) Effects of anticipated human-robot interaction and predictability of robot behavior on perceptions of anthropomorphism. In: Proc of the 6th HRI int conf on hum-robot interact (HRI 2011), pp 61–67 CrossRef
3.
Eyssel F, Kuchenbrandt D (2011) Manipulating anthropomorphic inferences about NAO: the role of situational and dispositional aspects of effectance motivation. In: Proc of the 20th IEEE int symp in robot and hum interact commun (RO-MAN 2011), pp 467–472
4.
Nass C, Fogg BJ, Moon Y (1996) Can computers be teammates? Int J Hum-Comput Stud 45:669–678 CrossRef
5.
Nass C, Moon Y (2000) Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. J Soc Issues 56:81–103 CrossRef
6.
Nass C, Steuer JS, Tauber E (1994) Computers are social actors. In: Proc of the CHI conf, pp 72–77
7.
Riether N, Hegel F, Wrede B, Horstmann G (2012) Social facilitation with social robots? In: Proc of the 7th ACM/IEEE conf hum-robot interact (HRI 2012), pp 41–48
8.
9.
Gray HM, Gray K, Wegner DM (2007) Dimensions of mind perception. Science 315:619 CrossRef
10.
Waytz A, Epley N, Cacioppo JT (2010) Social cognition unbound: insights into anthropomorphism and dehumanization. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 19:58–62 CrossRef
11.
Epley N, Waytz A, Cacioppo JT (2007) On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychol Rev 114:864–886 CrossRef
12.
Waytz A, Morewedge CK, Epley N, Monteleone G, Gao J, Cacioppo JT (2010) Making sense by making sentient: effectance motivation increases anthropomorphism. J Pers Soc Psychol 3:410–435. doi:10.​1037/​a0020240
13.
Luczak H, Rötting M, Schmidt L (2003) Let’s talk: anthropomorphization as a means to cope with stress of interacting with technical devices. Ergonomics 46:1361–1374 CrossRef
14.
Eyssel F, Hegel F, Horstmann G, Wagner C (2010) Anthropomorphic inferences from emotional nonverbal cues: a case study. In: Proc of the 19th IEEE int symp in robot and hum interact commun (RO-MAN 2010), pp 681–686
15.
Eyssel F, Hegel F (2012) (S)he’s got the look: gender-stereotyping of social robots. J Appl Soc Psychol 42:2213–2230 CrossRef
16.
Hegel F, Eyssel F, Wrede B (2010) The social robot flobi: key concepts of industrial design. In: Proc of the 19th IEEE int symp in robot and hum interact commun (RO-MAN 2010), pp 120–125
17.
Morewedge CK, Preston J, Wegner DM (2007) Timescale bias in the attribution of mind. J Pers Soc Psychol 93:1–11 CrossRef
18.
Eyssel F, Kuchenbrandt D, Bobinger S, de Ruiter L, Hegel F (2012) ‘If you sound like me, you must be more human’: on the interplay of robot and user features on human-robot acceptance and anthropomorphism. In: Proc of the 7th ACM/IEEE conf on hum-robot interact, pp 125–126
19.
20.
Duffy BR (2008) Fundamental issues in affective intelligent social machines. Open Artif Intell J 2:21–34 CrossRef
21.
Tajfel H, Turner JC (1979) An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: Austin WG, Worchel S (eds) The social psychology of intergroup relations. Brooks/Cole, Oxford, pp 33–47
22.
Gaertner SL, Dovidio JF (2000) Reducing intergroup bias: the common ingroup identity model. Psychol Press, New York
23.
Jackson LA, Hodge CN, Gerard DA, Ingram JM, Ervin KS, Sheppard LA (1996) Cognition, affect, and behavior in the prediction of group attitudes. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 22:306–316 CrossRef
24.
Tajfel H, Billig MG, Bundy RP, Flament C (1971) Social categorization and intergroup behavior. Eur J Soc Psychol 1:149–178 CrossRef
25.
Haslam N (2006) Dehumanization: an integrative review. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 10:252–264 CrossRef
26.
Leyens J-P, Paladino MP, Rodríguez-Torres R, Vaes J, Demoulin S, Rodríguez-Pérez A et al (2000) The emotional side of prejudice: the attribution of secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 4:186–197 CrossRef
27.
Leyens JPh, Rodriguez AP, Rodriguez RT, Gaunt R, Paladino PM, Vaes J, Demoulin S (2001) Psychological essentialism and the attribution of uniquely human emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Eur J Soc Psychol 31:395–411 CrossRef
28.
Nass C, Isbister K, Lee E-J (2000) Truth is beauty: researching embodied conversational agents. In: Cassells J (ed) Embodied conversational agents. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 374–402
29.
Banaji MR, Greenwald AG (1994) Implicit stereotyping and prejudice. In: Zanna MP, Olson JM (eds) The psychology of prejudice: the Ontario symposium, vol 7. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 55–76
30.
Greenwald AG, Banaji MR (1995) Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychol Rev 102:4–27 CrossRef
31.
Fazio RH, Jackson JR, Dunton BC, Williams CJ (1995) Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: a bona fide pipeline? J Pers Soc Psychol 69:1013–1027 CrossRef
32.
Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JKL (1998) Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. J Pers Soc Psychol 74:1464–1480 CrossRef
33.
De Houwer J, Teige-Mocigemba S, Spruyt A, Moors A (2009) Implicit measures: a normative analysis and review. Psychol Bull 135:347–368 CrossRef
34.
Wentura D, Degner J (2010) A practical guide to sequential priming and related tasks. In: Gawronski B, Payne BK (eds) Handbook of implicit social cognition: measurement, theory, and applications. Guilford Press, New York, pp 95–116
35.
Collins AM, Loftus EF (1975) A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychol Rev 82:407–428 CrossRef
36.
Rydell RJ, McConnell AR (2010) Consistency and inconsistency in implicit social cognition: the case of implicit and explicit measures of attitudes. In: Gawronski B, Payne BK (eds) Handbook of implicit social cognition: measurement, theory, and applications. Guilford Press, New York, pp 295–310
37.
Payne BK, Burkley M, Stokes MB (2008) Why do implicit and explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. J Pers Soc Psychol 94:16–31 CrossRef
38.
Goette L, Huffman D, Meier S (2006) The impact of group membership on cooperation and norm enforcement: evidence using random assignment to real social groups. Am Econ Rev 96:212–216 CrossRef
39.
Dovidio JF, Kawakami K, Gaertner SL (2002) Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. J Pers Soc Psychol 82:62–68 CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
When a Robot’s Group Membership Matters
Anthropomorphization of Robots as a Function of Social Categorization
verfasst von
Dieta Kuchenbrandt
Friederike Eyssel
Simon Bobinger
Maria Neufeld
Publikationsdatum
01.08.2013
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
International Journal of Social Robotics / Ausgabe 3/2013
Print ISSN: 1875-4791
Elektronische ISSN: 1875-4805
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0197-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2013

International Journal of Social Robotics 3/2013 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Automated Proxemic Feature Extraction and Behavior Recognition: Applications in Human-Robot Interaction

OriginalPaper

Interpretation of Emotional Body Language Displayed by a Humanoid Robot: A Case Study with Children

OriginalPaper

Living with a Vacuum Cleaning Robot

EditorialNotes

Robots Sing the Body Electric: Investigations of Body Language for Social and Spatial Interaction

OriginalPaper

Easy Interface and Control of Tele-education Robots

OriginalPaper

To Err is Human(-like): Effects of Robot Gesture on Perceived Anthropomorphism and Likability

Premium Partner

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen. 

    Zur Marktübersicht
    Bildnachweise