100% tevredenheidsgarantie Direct beschikbaar na betaling Zowel online als in PDF Je zit nergens aan vast
logo-home
SR compact summary; everything you want to read / repeat before the exam €4,49
In winkelwagen

Samenvatting

SR compact summary; everything you want to read / repeat before the exam

 77 keer bekeken  0 keer verkocht

This summary gives you a concise overview of important theories, concepts and information which were stretched during the course. This is a good summary to use the days up to the exam, to repeat everything that is of value

Voorbeeld 4 van de 39  pagina's

  • 28 november 2018
  • 39
  • 2018/2019
  • Samenvatting
Alle documenten voor dit vak (3)
avatar-seller
Marijtjee
College 1: Observations & Theory

A long history of m aking m achines after hum ans

Attem pts com e from a very rational approach to what a hum an is

M aking a robot after a hum an assum es we are not m uch m ore than
electronics and m echanics (18th century view)

Even adding intelligence (Turing) is a rational contribution

Yet, people interact with robots m ainly on a affective level

There are m any therapeutic advantages in applying social robots

People easily self-disclose to a robot without expecting to be judged by it,
that is strange:

W hat is a social robot, other than a sim ulation of hum an-like behavior by
com puter software, wrapped in electro-m echanical devices?

The sim ulated ‘agency’ does not even have to be fully autonom ous

A rem ote controlled robot will evoke the sam e results after a few m inutes

People tend to forget ‘the m an behind the curtains’ (W izard of Oz)

People focus on the robot as a com m unication partner on its own

People m ake plenty of attributions and project all kinds of qualities on to
robots, which are actually not there

Agency:
- Goals & Concerns
- Intentionally
- Artificial system
- Potentially capable of acting autonomously

Software agent:
Agency simulated by (semi) autonomous software system

Robot:
Software agent interacting through electro-mechanical devices

Social robot or android:
Robot specialized in humanoid situations

Care robot (or war robot, or tutor robot or...):
Social robot applied to care

,College 2: Observational studies

Interaction with a robot does not com e spontaneously

People are shy working with som ething they don’t know, or it sim ply does
not concern them (has no relevance to their life)

M ost people rely on others to know what they should do or think

M ake use of two types of people for the introduction of a robot: experts &
techno-forerunners that are m em bers of your target group

At first, m ake the robot ‘do som ething’ to draw attention

Does not have to be com plicated as long as it is not idle

Then, work on an application relevant to your audience

To stim ulate technology acceptance, the best way to get people experienced
with robots is to let them help m ake them (cf. Robopop)

Also prom ises the design of relevant applications

Creativity is encouraged by an open and diverse com m unity, unorganized
and focused on sharing, rather than defending intellectual property

The creative process roughly knows two stages:
- Open idea form ation
- M ore precise im plem entation

Before, during and after design, observation is prim e to understand
people’s unguided free interactions

Various form s to record observations:
- Field notes
- Audio/video
- Respondent journals

After sam pling, you m ake an observation coding schem e

Social robots encounter situations that have social, linguistic, as well as engineering
aspects. The field is young. There is no standard solution to any question. Hence,
multidisciplinary work is required.

Paro as cat was too familiar to be believable

People ignore robots (Paro), but for different reasons (Chang, Sabanovic & Huber, 2014)

Self-disclosure happens with a robot

CASA, but not entirely:
Paro is not judgmental, not going behind your back, a feeling of privacy

Moshkina, Trickett & Trafton, 2014:
Expect: The more human-like, the more social responses

,Experimental (observation) design:
Voice x Voice+Lips x Voice+Lips+Facial Expressions x Voice+Lips+Facial
Expressions+Gestures x Voice+Lips+Facial Expressions+Gestures+Gameplay

CASA prediction is to find an increasing trend (the more human-like, the more social
responses)

Result was parabolic growth: gameplay did not result in more engagement

CASA only goes so far: there is an optimum after which the value decreases

Possible reasons:
- If the robot confirms it social construct (for example functional) it is more
effective (functional robot is not playful)
- Novelty effect might wear out quickly
- People watch what others do before reacting themselves
- No relevance to the task at hand

In natural settings, people don’t come for your robot. Would random motion have done
the same?

Minimal social cues invoke more engagement than no social cues

More human-like behaviors lead to more social engagement

Gameplay did not add to the less social behaviors. CASA only goes so far (parabolic
growth).

There should be relevance to the task at hand

A robot is not a human and does not have to be, it occupies its own social niche

Some things machines do better than humans:
- People with dementia react to robot noise, but not to people.
- People self-disclose more to a robot.
- Robots do not deceive: what you see is what you get

Unified Theory of Accaptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT):
Experience is prime for acceptance, so we should start young

UTAUT identifies four key factors (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social
influence, and facilitating conditions) and four moderators (age, gender, experience, and
voluntariness) related to predicting behavioral intention to use a technology and actual
technology use primarily in organizational contexts

Position of the robot is key. The robot needs to be the lesser

Order is less informational than chaos or mess

Creativity thrives on a mess

4 creative techniques:
1. Comparison to other domains
2. Provide question instead of solution
3. Demonstrate failing prototype, then go to step 2
4. Cooperation & sharing knowledge

, College 4: H um an relations with m achines

People love and hate different things, dolls and objects included

It is too easy to dism iss them as crazy, because 1) they are not delusional
and 2) what decides what m akes other people happy?

Everybody has the capacity to love anim ated objects, som e m ore than
others

M edia Equation predicts that people will autom atically respond naturally
and socially to m edia such as robots

W hat seem s real is m ore im portant than what is real

The M edia Equation holds that people react to what is there; they prefer
easy and sim ple interactions

That is why they rely on hum an ways of dealing with robots

From this, CASA evolved

CASA says that the m ore a com puter or robot com plies with hum an
(conversational) rules such as reciprocity, the higher the perform ance (e.g.
self-disclosure)

CASA predicts that people apply hum an conventions m indlessly to robots.
They do not think, but just act

This only goes so far!

There is evidence that people som etim es do think, perceive differences and
respond differently to robots than to hum ans

Affective Com puting attem pts the creation of an em otional responsive
robot/agent system

This brings artificial system s closer to the M edia Equation and CASA

Apart from sim ulating em otions, Affective Com puting whishes to recognize
em otions of users

This is a heroic attem pt, because in spite of all the physiological
m easurem ents, em otional experience cannot be read from em otional
expression (Kuleshov effect)

Self-report is hard too, particularly afterwards: em otions subside once you
reflect on them in a survey

M edia Equation & CASA observed m any phenom ena of people loving and
hating their m achines and suggested an evolutionary and neurological
explanation

Theory of Affective Bonding goes further in trying the integration of
experiential m odels of behavior, with faster and slower pathways of the
brain

Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:

Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews

Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews

Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!

Snel en makkelijk kopen

Snel en makkelijk kopen

Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.

Focus op de essentie

Focus op de essentie

Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!

Veelgestelde vragen

Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?

Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.

Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?

Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.

Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?

Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Marijtjee. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.

Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?

Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.

Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?

4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 53068 samenvattingen verkocht

Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen

Start met verkopen
€4,49
  • (0)
In winkelwagen
Toegevoegd