skip to main content
10.1145/3029798.3038418acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Does the User's Evaluation of a Socially Assistive Robot Change Based on Presence and Companionship Type?

Published:06 March 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

A lack of motivation is the most common obstacle for physical activity. Socially Assistive Robots (SAR) can be used to motivate people to workout regularly. However, the embodiment and companionship type can influence user's engagement. We investigated the effects of embodiment (co-present vs. remote-located) and companionship (instructor vs. companion) in a video Human-Robot Interaction (vHRI) study (n=90).

References

  1. C. Bartneck, D. Kulić, E. Croft, and S. Zoghbi. Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1(1):71--81, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. D. L. Feltz, S. T. Forlenza, B. Winn, and N. L. Kerr. Cyber buddy is better than no buddy: A test of the köhler motivation effect in exergames. GAMES FOR HEALTH: Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 3(2):98--105, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Z. Gao, S. Chen, D. Pasco, and Z. Pope. A meta-analysis of active video games on health outcomes among children and adolescents. obesity reviews, 16(9):783--794, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. J. Li. The benefit of being physically present: a survey of experimental works comparing copresent robots, telepresent robots and virtual agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 77:23--37, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. G. Stulp, A. P. Buunk, S. Verhulst, and T. V. Pollet. High and mighty: Height increases authority in professional refereeing. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(3):147470491201000314, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. A. Tapus, M. J. Mataric, and B. Scasselati. Socially assistive robotics {grand challenges of robotics}. Robotics & Automation Magazine, IEEE, 14(1):35--42, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Does the User's Evaluation of a Socially Assistive Robot Change Based on Presence and Companionship Type?

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          HRI '17: Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
          March 2017
          462 pages
          ISBN:9781450348850
          DOI:10.1145/3029798

          Copyright © 2017 Owner/Author

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 6 March 2017

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • abstract

          Acceptance Rates

          HRI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate51of211submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate192of519submissions,37%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader