12.07.2015 Views

View - ResearchGate

View - ResearchGate

View - ResearchGate

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

176 Socially Intelligent AgentsWe can also cue Sparky to make vocalizations, which sound something likemuffled speech combined with a French horn. Just as in the case of ambientmotion, the affective content of each sound is correlated to Sparky’s emotionalstate. There are several sounds available in each state.A more comprehensive description of the robot is provided in our previouswork [10].4. Observing Sparky and PeopleTo explore our research questions two venues were chosen in which to explorehuman-robot interaction, one in the lab and the second in public.In the Lab. Thirty external subjects were recruited for 17 trials in ourinternal lab (singles and dyads). Approximately 50% of subjects were betweenages 8–14, 13% were 19–30, 17% were 35–45 and 20% were over age 65.There was an even mix of genders. Subjects answered several backgroundquestions, interacted with the robot for about 15 minutes, and then discussedthe experience with the interviewer in the room. Interactions between the robotand the subject were necessarily chaotic; we tried simply to react reasonably tothe subject’s actions while still manifesting the personality we have describedabove.In Public. Tests were conducted 2–3 hours a day for six days at an interactivescience museum. The robot was released for an hour at a time to “wander”in an open area. There were no signs or explanations posted.5. ReactionsReactions are grouped into three categories. In “Observed behavior” wereport on what users did with the robot. In “Interview response” we cover thefeedback they gave to the interviewer in lab testing. Finally, in “Operating therobot” we report on what the operators experienced.5.1 Observed behaviorChildren were usually rapt with attention and treated the robot as if it werealive. Young children (4–7ish) tended to be very energetic around the robot(giddy, silly, etc.) and had responses that were usually similar regardless ofgender. They were generally very kind to Sparky. Occasionally, a group ofchildren might tease or provoke Sparky and we would then switch into a sad,nervous, or afraid state. This provoked an immediate empathetic response.Older children (7ish to early teens) were also engaged but had different interactionpatterns depending on gender. Older boys were usually aggressivetowards Sparky. Boys often made ugly faces at the robot and did such things

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!