research-article

Social Psychology and Human-Robot Interaction: An Uneasy Marriage

Authors:

Séverin Lemaignan,

Fotios Papadopoulos,

Emmanuel Senft,

Tony BelpaemeAuthors Info & Claims

HRI '18: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Pages 13 - 20

https://doi.org/10.1145/3173386.3173389

Published: 01 March 2018 Publication History

Abstract

The field of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) lies at the intersection of several disciplines, and is rightfully perceived as a prime interface between engineering and the social sciences. In particular, our field entertains close ties with social and cognitive psychology, and there are many HRI studies which build upon commonly accepted results from psychology to explore the novel relation between humans and machines. Key to this endeavour is the trust we, as a field, put in the methodologies and results from psychology, and it is exactly this trust that is now being questioned across psychology and, by extension, should be questioned in HRI. The starting point of this paper are a number of failed attempts by the authors to replicate old and established results on social facilitation, which leads us to discuss our arguable over-reliance and over-acceptance of methods and results from psychology. We highlight the recent "replication crisis" in psychology, which directly impacts the HRI community and argue that our field should not shy away from developing its own reference tasks.

References

[1]

A.A. Aarts, C.J. Anderson, J. Anderson, M.A.L.M. van Assen, P.R. Attridge, et almbox. . 2015. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, Vol. 349, 6251 (2015).

[2]

F.H. Allport . 1924. Social Psychology. Houghton Mifflin Company, Chapter Response to social stimulation in the group, 260--291.

[3]

M. Baker . 2016. 1500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature News, Vol. 533, 7604 (2016), 452.

[4]

C. Bartneck . 2011. The End of the Beginning: A Reflection on the First Five Years of the HRI Conference. Scientometrics, Vol. 86, 2 (2011), 487--504.

Digital Library

[5]

C. Bartneck . 2017. Reviewers' scores do not predict impact - Bibliometric Analysis of the Proceedings of the Human-Robot Interaction Conference. Scientometrics, Vol. 110, 1 (2017), 179--194.

Digital Library

[6]

P. Baxter, J. Kennedy, E. Senft, S. Lemaignan, and T. Belpaeme . 2016. From characterising three years of HRI to methodology and reporting recommendations The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction. IEEE Press, 391--398.

Digital Library

[7]

C.F. Bond . 1982. Social Facilitation: A self-presentational view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 42, 6 (1982), 1042--1050.

[8]

C.F. Bond and L.J. Titus . 1983. Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological bulletin Vol. 94, 2 (1983), 265--292.

[9]

J. Cohen . 1977. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.

[10]

N.B. Cottrell, R.H. Rittle, and D.L. Wack . 1967. The presence of an audience and list type (competitional or noncompetitional) as joint determinants of performance in paired associates learning. Journal of Personality Vol. 35 (1967), 425--434.

[11]

W.D. Criddle . {n. d.}. The physical presence of other individuals as factor in social facilitation. Psychonomic Science, Vol. 22, 4 (. {n. d.}), 229--230.

[12]

J.M. Feinberg and J.R. Aiello . 2010. The Effect of Challenge and Threat Appraisals Under Evaluative Presence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology Vol. 40, 8 (2010), 2071--2104.

[13]

T.R. Fosgaard, L.G. Hansen, and M. Piovesan . 2013. Separating Will from Grace: An experiment on conformity and awareness in cheating. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization Vol. 93 (2013), 279--284.

[14]

V.J. Ganzer . 1968. Effects of audience presence and test anxiety on learning and retention in a serial learning situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 8, 2 (Pt. 1) (1968), 194--199.

[15]

W.L. Gardner and M.L. Knowles . 2008. Love Makes You Real: Favorite Television Characters Are Perceived as "Real" in a Social Facilitation Paradigm. Social Cognition, Vol. 26, 2 (2008), 156--168.

[16]

R.G. Geen . 1973. Effects of being observed on short- and long-term recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology Vol. 100 (1973), 395--398.

[17]

B. Guerin . 1983. Social Facilitation and social monitoring: a test of three models. British Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 22 (1983), 203--214.

[18]

B. Guerin . 1989. Reducing evaluation effects in mere presence. The Journal of Social Psychology Vol. 129, 2 (1989), 183--190.

[19]

J.P. Hill and R.A. Kochendorfer . 1969. Knowledge of peer success and risk of detection as determinants of cheating. Developmental Psychology Vol. 1, 3 (1969), 231--238.

[20]

L.K. John, G. Loewenstein, and D. Prelec . 2012. Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological science Vol. 23, 5 (2012), 524--532.

[21]

S.R.G. Jones . 1992. Was There a Hawthorne Effect? Amer. J. Sociology Vol. 98, 3 (1992), 451--468.

[22]

J.P. Lombardo and J.F. Catalano . 1975. The effect of failure and the nature of the audience on performance of a complex motor task. Journal of Motor Behavior Vol. 7 (1975), 29--35.

[23]

R.J. McCaffrey, J.M. Fisher, B.A. Gold, and J.K. Lynch . 1996. Presence of third parties during neuropsychological evaluations: Who is evaluating whom? The Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol. 10, 4 (1996), 435--449.

[24]

J. McCambridge, J. Witton, and D.R. Elbourne . 2014. Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: New concepts are needed to study research participation effects. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Vol. 67, 3 (2014), 267--277.

[25]

F.G. Miller, M.E Hurkman, J.B. Robinson, and R.A. Feinberg . 1979. Status and evaluation potential in the social facilitation and impairment of task performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Vol. 5 (1979), 381--385.

[26]

D.S. Nagin and G. Pogarsky . 2003. An Experimental Investigation of Deterrence: Cheating, Self-Serving Bias, and Impulsivity. Criminology, Vol. 41, 1 (2003), 167--194.

[27]

N. Riether, F. Hegel, B. Wrede, and G. Horstmann . 2012. Social facilitation with social robots?. In Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI '12. 41--47.

Digital Library

[28]

F.J. Roethlisberger, W.J. Dickson, H.A. Wright, and Western Electric Company . 1939. Management and the Worker: An Account of a Research Program Conducted by the Western Electric Company, Hawthorne Works, Chicago. Harvard University Press.

[29]

M.S. Rosenberg . 2005. The file-drawer problem revisited: a general weighted method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution, Vol. 59, 2 (2005), 464--468.

[30]

R. Rosenthal . 1979. The "file drawer problem" and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin Vol. 86, 3 (1979), 638--641.

[31]

H.R. Rothstein, A.J. Sutton, and M. Borenstein . 2006. Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. John Wiley & Sons.

[32]

P. Schermerhorn, M. Scheutz, and C.R. Crowell . 2008. Robot Social Presence and Gender: Do Females View Robots Differently than Males? ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2008), 263--270.

Digital Library

[33]

J.P. Simmons, L.D. Nelson, and U. Simonsohn . 2011. False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological science Vol. 22, 11 (2011), 1359--1366.

[34]

W. Stroebe . 2012. The truth about Triplett (1898), but nobody seems to care. Perspectives on Psychological Science Vol. 7, 1 (2012), 54--57.

[35]

M.J. Strube, M.E. Miles, and W.H. Finch . 1981. The social facilitation of a simple task: Field tests of alternative explanations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin Vol. 7 (1981), 701--707.

[36]

D.J. Terry and M. Kearnes . 1993. Effects of an audience on the task performance of subjects with high and low self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences Vol. 15, 2 (1993), 137--145.

[37]

N. Triplett . 1898. The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. American Journal of Psychology Vol. 9, 4 (. 1898), 507--533.

[38]

L. Uziel . 2007. Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality Vol. 41, 3 (2007), 579--601.

[39]

F.T. Vitro and L.A. Schoer . 1972. The effects of probability of test success, test importance, and risk of detection on the incidence of cheating. Journal of School Psychology Vol. 10, 3 (1972), 269--277.

[40]

K.D. Vohs and W. Schooler . 2008. The Value of Believing in Free Will: Encouraging a Belief in Determinism Increases Cheating. Psychological Science Vol. 19, 1 (2008), 49--54.

[41]

I. Wechsung, P. Ehrenbrink, R. Schleicher, and S. Möller . 2014. Investigating the Social Facilitation Effect in Human-Robot Interaction Natural Interaction with Robots, Knowbots and Smartphones: Putting Spoken Dialog Systems into Practice, bibfieldeditorJ. Mariani, S. Rosset, M. Garnier-Rizet, and L. Devillers (Eds.). Springer, New York, 167--177.

[42]

R.B. Zajonc . 1965. Social facilitation. Science, Vol. 149, 3681 (1965), 269--274.

Cited By

Pereira AMarcinek LMiniota JThunberg SLagerstedt EGustafson JSkantze GIrfan B(2024)Multimodal User Enjoyment Detection in Human-Robot Conversation: The Power of Large Language ModelsProceedings of the 26th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction10.1145/3678957.3685729(469-478)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678957.3685729
Abbasi NLaban GFord TJones PGunes H(2024)Robotising Psychometrics: Validating Wellbeing Assessment Tools in Child-Robot Interactions2024 33rd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (ROMAN)10.1109/RO-MAN60168.2024.10731253(1651-1658)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN60168.2024.10731253
Hildt E(2024)Some Critical Thoughts on Anthropomorphic Social Robot DesignThe Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot Interaction10.1017/9781009386708.020(302-312)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009386708.020
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Social Psychology and Human-Robot Interaction: An Uneasy Marriage
1. Applied computing
  1. Law, social and behavioral sciences
    1. Psychology
2. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. HCI design and evaluation methods
      1. User studies

Recommendations

The Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS): Development and Validation
HRI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Accurately measuring perceptions of robots has become increasingly important as technological progress permits more frequent and extensive interaction between people and robots. Across four studies, we develop and validate a scale to measure social ...
Integrating robot ethics and machine morality: the study and design of moral competence in robots

Robot ethics encompasses ethical questions about how humans should design, deploy, and treat robots; machine morality encompasses questions about what moral capacities a robot should have and how these capacities could be computationally implemented. ...
Evaluating Social Perception of Human-to-Robot Handovers Using the Robot Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS)
HRI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

This work explores social perceptions of robots within the domain of human-to-robot handovers. Using the Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS), we explore how users socially judge robot receivers as three factors are varied: initial position of the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

HRI '18: Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 2018

431 pages

ISBN:9781450356152

DOI:10.1145/3173386

General Chairs:
Takayuki Kanda
ATR, Japan
,
Selma Ŝabanović
Indiana University Bloomington, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Guy Hoffman
Cornell University, USA
,
Adriana Tapus
ENSTA-ParisTech, France

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGAI: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence
SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction
IEEE-RAS: Robotics and Automation

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 March 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

European Commission

Conference

HRI '18

Sponsor:

SIGAI
SIGCHI
IEEE-RAS

HRI '18: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

March 5 - 8, 2018

IL, Chicago, USA

Acceptance Rates

HRI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate 49 of 206 submissions, 24%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 192 of 519 submissions, 37%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

55
Total Citations
View Citations
1,112
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)126
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7

Reflects downloads up to 11 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Pereira AMarcinek LMiniota JThunberg SLagerstedt EGustafson JSkantze GIrfan B(2024)Multimodal User Enjoyment Detection in Human-Robot Conversation: The Power of Large Language ModelsProceedings of the 26th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction10.1145/3678957.3685729(469-478)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3678957.3685729
Abbasi NLaban GFord TJones PGunes H(2024)Robotising Psychometrics: Validating Wellbeing Assessment Tools in Child-Robot Interactions2024 33rd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (ROMAN)10.1109/RO-MAN60168.2024.10731253(1651-1658)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN60168.2024.10731253
Hildt E(2024)Some Critical Thoughts on Anthropomorphic Social Robot DesignThe Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot Interaction10.1017/9781009386708.020(302-312)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009386708.020
(2024)Issues and Concerns for Human–Robot InteractionThe Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot Interaction10.1017/9781009386708.013(171-390)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009386708.013
Wullenkord RLacroix DEyssel F(2024)Anthropomorphism and Human–Robot InteractionThe Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot Interaction10.1017/9781009386708.005(17-56)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009386708.005
(2024)An Introduction to the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot InteractionThe Cambridge Handbook of the Law, Policy, and Regulation for Human–Robot Interaction10.1017/9781009386708.003(1-170)Online publication date: 7-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009386708.003
Ren QBelpaeme T(2024)Tactile Interaction with Social Robots Influences Attitudes and BehaviourInternational Journal of Social Robotics10.1007/s12369-024-01191-516:11-12(2297-2317)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-024-01191-5
Jhang KChien W(2024)A Telepresence Robot Partner for Remote Work: An Exploration into Design and Its Psychological EffectHuman-Computer Interaction10.1007/978-3-031-60412-6_8(105-115)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60412-6_8
Liu HWang FZhang D(2023)Inspiring Real-Time Evaluation and Optimization of Human–Robot Interaction with Psychological Findings from Human–Human InteractionApplied Sciences10.3390/app1302067613:2(676)Online publication date: 4-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.3390/app13020676
Ligthart MNeerincx MHindriks K(2023)It Takes Two: Using Co-creation to Facilitate Child-Robot Co-regulationACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/359381212:4(1-32)Online publication date: 23-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3593812
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents