Whose job is it anyway? a study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task

By Pamela J. Hinds, Teresa L. Roberts, Hank Jones. 2004

383 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/107b6f97997d044dd7c2d2171bc2ebd01651e248

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Social Robots as Embedded Reinforcers of Social Behavior in Children with Autism (2012, background): “This was demonstrated, for instance, in a 2-week ﬁeld trial of school-aged, typically developing children’s daily interaction, with a social robot, in which most children’s interactions with the robot declined in the second week (Kanda et al. 2004).”
Evaluating Fluency in Human–Robot Collaboration (2019, background): “[5]) effect perceptions of fluency? How to account for corrections and repetitions of identical actions? And how to extend these measures to larger mixed teams than just one human and one robot?”
Robot navigation in dense human crowds: Statistical models and experimental studies of human–robot cooperation (2015, unknown): “…Montemerlo et al., 2002), to robots that perform household chores (Kruse et al., 2010), to field trials for interacting robots as social partners (Kanda et al., 2004; Saiki et al., 2012), to decorum for robot hosts (Sidner and Lee, 2003), and even to protocols for social robot design (Glas et…”
A sociable robot to encourage social interaction among the elderly (2006, methodology): “To put this evaluation into an existing framework, we can say that we see some firstorder (individual) effects and some second-order (social and cultural) effects as described in the 2004 paper by Forlizzi, et al. [ 10 ].”
The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots (2006, background): “Kanda et al. (2004) tested a child-size interactive humanoid robot (Robovie) at an elementary schools for several weeks.”
How Humans Teach Agents - A New Experimental Perspective (2012, background): “Of the relevant social robotics studies which we are aware, all used both human-human and human-robot interaction [14, 30].”
Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human–robot interaction (2007, unknown): “In robotics research, community service robotics, where robots perform tasks for people and/or in interaction with people, has become an interesting challenge: see Thrun (2004) for a discussion of past-and present-day robotics in the context of HRI.”
A review of the applicability of robots in education (2013, methodology): “For example English was taught to Japanese children by the Robovie robot in [6] by researchers from the robotics laboratory ATR, Kyoto and in [9] English was taught to Korean children using the Tiro robot.”
Social Robots for Long-Term Interaction: A Survey (2013, background): “[34] performed a field trial evaluation for two weeks (9 school days) with elementary school Japanese students and two English-speaking interactive humanoid robots behaving as peer English tutors.”
The Uncanny Valley: Effect of Realism on the Impression of Artificial Human Faces (2007, background): “…is acknowledged as a guideline to design the physical appearance of robots (Cañamero & Fredslund, 2001; DiSalvo et al. , 2002; Fong et al. , 2003; Hinds et al. , 2004; Minato et al., 2004a; Minato et al., 2004b; Woods et al. , 2004) and agents in virtual reality (Aylett, 2004; Fabri et al. ,…”