The Impact of Robot Appearance Types and Robot Behavior Types on People's Perception of a Robot = 로봇의 외형과 행동유형이 로봇에 대한 인식에 미치는 영향

국문 초록 (Abstract)

로봇의 외형과 행동은 인간형과 제품형, 두 가지 유형으로 분류될 수 있다. 인간형 로봇은 인간의 외형과 행동을 닮은 유형이며, 제품형 로봇은 기존 제품과 유사한 형태를 지닌 유형으로써, 제품의 기능을 극대화시켜주는 유형이다. 본 연구에서는 인간형 로봇과 제품형 로봇에 대해 비교하고, 로봇의 유형이 사람이 인식하는 로봇의 사회적 실재감, 사회성과 서비스 만족도에 미치는 영향에 대해 알아보고자 한다. 이 실험은 로봇의 외형유형 (인간형 vs. 제품형)과 행동유형 (인간형 vs. 제품형)에 따른 사용자의 로봇 인상평가에 대한 2X2 피험자 내 실험을 실시하였다. 실험 결과, 피험자는 인간형 외형을 지닌 로봇에 제품형 외형을 지닌 로봇보다 더 많은 사회적 실재감과 사회성을 느끼는 반면, 제품형 외형을 지닌 로봇이 제공하는 서비스에 인간형 외형을 지닌 로봇이 제공하는 서비스보다 더 만족하였다. 로봇의 행동유형에서도 동일한 결과가 나타났다. 또한, 인간형 행동을 지닌 로봇의 경우, 제품형 외형이 인간형 외형보다 더 많은 사회적 실재감과 사회성을 지닌다고 평가되는 반면, 제품형 행동을 지닌 로봇의 경우, 인간형 외형이 제품형 외형보다 더 많은 사회적 실재감과 사회성을 지닌다고 평가되었다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Robot"s appearance types and behavior types could be classified into two types: human-oriented and product-oriented. Human-oriented robot resembles human"s appearance and behavior whereas product-oriented robot maximizes the robot"s dedicated functions. In this study, we compared human-oriented and product-oriented robots, and investigated the impact of two robot appearance types and two robot behavior types on perceived social presence, sociability, and service evaluation of a robot. We executed a 2 (robot appearance types: human-oriented vs. product-oriented) x 2 (robot behavior types: human-oriented vs. product-oriented) within-participants experiment design (N=24). Participants perceived more social presence and sociability to a robot with human-oriented appearance than that with product-oriented appearance whereas they were more satisfied with service provided by a robot with product-oriented appearance than that with human-oriented appearance. The same results were revealed for robot behavior types. Moreover, in the case of a robot with human-oriented behavior, people perceived product-oriented appearance as having more social presence and sociability than human-oriented appearance while in the case of a robot with product-oriented behavior, they evaluated human-oriented appearance more positively than product-oriented appearance. Implications for the design of human-robot interaction are discussed.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Abstract
• 요약
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Related Works
• 3. Study Design
• 4. Results
• 5. Discussions
• 6. Conclusions
• References

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 곽소나, "의인화적 사운드 피드백에 따른 로봇의 사용성과 인간의 공감 정도" 한국디자인학회 25 (25): 20-27, 2012

2 Swartz, L., "Why people hate the paperclip: Labels, appearance, behavior, and social responses to user interface agents" Stanford University 2003

3 Hegel, F., "Understanding social robots: A user study on anthropomorphism" 2008

4 Stifelman, L. J., "Tool to support speech and non-speech audio feedback generation in audio interfaces" 1995

5 Brenton, H., "The uncanny valley: Does it exist?" 2005

6 Forlizzi, J., "The sensechair: The lounge chair as an intelligent assistive device for elders" 2005

7 Bruce, A., "The role of expressiveness and attention in human–robot interaction" 2002

8 Lee, K. M., "The multiple source effect and synthesized speech : Doubly disembodied language as a conceptual framework" 30 : 2004

9 Heerink, M., "The influence of social presence on acceptance of a companion robot by older people" 2 (2): 2008

10 Bartneck, C., "The influence of robot anthropomorphism on the feelings of embarrassment when interacting with robots" 1 (1): 2010

11 Kim, R. H., "The effect of robot appearance types on motivating donation" 2014

12 곽소나, "The Impact of the Robot Appearance Types on Social Interaction with a Robot and Service Evaluation of a Robot" 한국디자인학회 27 (27): 81-93, 2014

13 Hoffman, G, "Shimon: An interactive improvisational robotic marimba player" 2010

14 Kaplan, F., "Roomba is not a robot: AIBO is still alive!, Anthropomorphic language in online forums" 2011

15 Ishiguro, H., "Robovie : An interactive human-oriented robot" 28 : 2001

16 Breazeal, C., "Robot in society: Friend or appliance?" 1999

17 Walters, M., "Preferences and perceptions of robot appearance and embodiment in human-robot interaction trials" 2009

18 Personal Robots Group, "MDS overview" Personal Robots Group

19 Sullivan, L., "Louis Sullivan, kindergarten chats and other writings" George Wittenborn 1896

20 Rey, F., "Interactive mobile robotic drinking glasses" 8 : 2009

21 Komatsu, T., "How do robotic agents' appearances affect people's interpretations of the agents' attitudes?" 2007

22 Friedman, B., "Hardware companions?: What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human-robotic relationship" 2003

23 Lee, M. K., "Gracefully mitigating breakdowns in robotic services" 2010

24 Hoffman, G., "Ensemble: Fluency and embodiment for robots acting with humans" Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2007

25 Powers, A., "Eliciting information from people with a gendered humanoid robot" 2005

26 Minato, T., "Development of an android robot for studying human–robot interaction, innovations in applied artificial intelligence" 2004

27 Breazeal, C. L., "Designing sociable robots" MIT Press 2002

28 Lee, M. K., "Designing adaptive robotic services" 2009

29 Kim, B., "Design guideline of anthropomorphic sound feedback for service robot malfunction – with emphasis on the vacuum cleaning robot" 2009

30 Kwak, S. S., "Can robots be sold?: The effects of robot designs on the consumers’ acceptance of robots" 2014

31 Mori, M, "Bukimi no tani(The uncanny valley)" 7 (7): 1970

32 Walters, M., "Avoiding the uncanny valley: Robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion" 24 (24): 2008

33 DiSalvo, C. F., "All robots are not created equal: The design and perception of human-oriented robot heads" 2002

34 Kanda, T., "A humanoid robot that pretends to listen to route guidance from a human" 22 (22): 2007

35 Li, S., "A dialog system for comparative user studies on robot verbal behavior" 2006