The Benefits of Interactions with Physically Present Robots over Video-Displayed Agents
By Wilma A. Bainbridge, Justin W. Hart, Elizabeth S. Kim, Brian Scassellati. Int. J. Soc. Robotics, 2011
488 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Social Psychology, Human-Computer Interaction
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7fc366a2deea99d42f2ac1babfb512f8782dc274
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Social Psychology
- Iolanda Leite
- Hana Boukricha
- Ipke Wachsmuth
- Ana Paiva
- Ella Glikson
- Björn Schuller
- Rosalind W. Picard
- Kerstin Dautenhahn
In Human-Computer Interaction
- Ana Paiva
- Iolanda Leite
- Ella Glikson
- Tim J. Smith
- Björn Schuller
- Rosalind W. Picard
- Kerstin Dautenhahn
- Anita Williams Woolley
Citations in the corpus
- ECHOES: An intelligent serious game for fostering social communication in children with autism (2014, background): “A number of studies (e.g., [6,31,73]) have shown that physical embodiment promotes higher social engagement and attribution than virtual embodiment, as well as greater enjoyment, believability and trustfulness, especially with regard to cooperative tasks.”
- Human Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Review of Empirical Research (2020, background): “For instance, Bainbridge, Hart, Kim, and Scassellati (2011) compared a physically present robot and an identical 2D image presented on a screen.”
- Personalized machine learning for robot perception of affect and engagement in autism therapy (2018, background): “Recently, social robots have been used to this end because many children withASC find themenjoyable and engaging, perhaps due to their humanlike yet predictable and nonthreatening nature (13).”
- Empathy in Virtual Agents and Robots (2017, background): “We divide the review of agents evoking empathy into two section because the type of the agent’s embodiment can affect users’ perception and experience (Pereira et al. 2008; Bainbridge et al. 2011; Leyzberg et al. 2012).”
- Would You Trust a (Faulty) Robot? Effects of Error, Task Type and Personality on Human-Robot Cooperation and Trust (2015, methodology): “[1], which measured whether human participants trusted a robot by following its ‘unusual request’ of throwing away a pile of new textbooks in someone’s office, either based on the robot’s physical versus on-screen presence.”
- Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios (2016, background): “Bainbridge et al. found that participants were willing to throw books in the trash when a physically present robot gave the instruction, but not when the robot was located in another room communicating through a video interface [1].”