skip to main content
10.1145/3029798.3034782acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Wizard of Awwws: Exploring Psychological Impact on the Researchers in Social HRI Experiments

Published:06 March 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

In social Human-Robot Interaction (sHRI) people have studied social interactions with awkward, confrontational, or unsettling robots. In order to create these situations, researchers often secretly control the robot (the "Wizard of Oz", WoZ, technique), use confederates (researchers pretending to be participants), or the researchers themselves create the desired social condition. While these studies may be antagonistic, they are designed to be ethical; when conducting a study, IRB (Institutional Review Board) processes are in place to assess the study design for potential risk to participants, and to ultimately protect the public. However, these processes do not generally involve assessment of impact on the researchers conducting the study. In our own work, we have noted how researcher "wizards" in social HRI experiments, particularly those which place participants in awkward or confrontational situations, can themselves be negatively impacted from the experience when their experiment protocol has them antagonize, deceive, or argue with participants. In this paper, we explore how experimental design can impact the wellbeing of the researchers, particularly for wizards in social HRI experiments. By building a psychological grounding for the impact on people who do socially stressful actions, we evaluate the potential for researcher social stress in recent sHRI studies. Our summary and discussion of this survey results in recommendations for future HRI research to reduce the burden on wizards in their own experiments.

References

  1. Christoph Bartneck, Timo Bleeker, Jeroen Bun, Pepijn Fens, and Lynyrd Riet. 2010. The influence of robot anthropomorphism on the feelings of embarrassment when interacting with robots. Paladyn Journal of Behavioral Ro 1, 2: 109--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Christoph Bartneck, Michel van der Hoek, Omar Mubin, and Abdullah Al Mahmud. 2007. "Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do!" Proceeding of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction - HRI '07, 2007: 217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Christoph Bartneck, Marcel Verbunt, Omar Mubin, and Abdullah Al Mahmud. 2007. To kill a mockingbird robot. Human-robot interaction, ACM Press, 8 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. R. F. Baumeister and M. R. Leary. 1995. The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin 117, 3: 497--529.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Diana Baumrind. 1985. Research using intentional deception. Ethical issues revisited. American Psychologist 40, 2: 165--174.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gurit E. Birnbaum, Moran Mizrahi, Guy Hoffman, Harry T. Reis, Eli J. Finkel, and Omri Sass. 2016. Machines as a source of consolation: Robot responsiveness increases human approach behavior and desire for companionship. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction 2016--April: 165--171. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Paul Bremner, Huseyin Cakal, Miriam Koschate-reis, and Mark Levine. 2015. Social Tele-Operation by Confederates?: Applying the Actor-Confederate Paradigm to HRI. Workshop in IROS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Gordon Briggs and Matthias Scheutz. 2014. How Robots Can Affect Human Behavior: Investigating the Effects of Robotic Displays of Protest and Distress. International Journal of Social Robotics 6, 3: 343--355.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Priscilla Briggs, Matthias Scheutz, and Linda Tickle-Degnen. 2015. Are Robots Ready for Administering Health Status Surveys?. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI '15, ACM Press, 327--334. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Drazen Brscić, Hiroyuki Kidokoro, Yoshitaka Suehiro, and Takayuki Kanda. 2015. Escaping from Children's Abuse of Social Robots. Human-Robot Interaction, ACM Press, 59--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Emily A Butler, Boris Egloff, Frank H Wilhelm, Nancy C Smith, Elizabeth A Erickson, and James J Gross. 2003. The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion 3, 1: 48--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Sheldon Cohen. 1980. Aftereffects of stress on human performance and social behavior: a review of research and theory. Psychological Bulletin 88, 1: 82.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. D. Cormier, G. Newman, M. Nakane, and J. E. Young. 2013. Would You Do as a Robot Commands? An Obedience Study for Human-Robot Interaction. In Proc. of the First International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, iHAI'13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Marcia A. Corvetto and Jeffrey M. Taekman. 2013. To Die or Not To Die? A Review of Simulated Death. Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare 8, 1: 8--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Norman S Endler and J D Parker. 1990. Multidimensional assessment of coping: a critical evaluation. Journal of personality and social psychology 58, 5: 844--854.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Nathanael J. Fast, Nir Halevy, and Adam D. Galinsky. 2012. The destructive nature of power without status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 48, 1: 391--394.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Julie Fitness and Marie Curtis. 2005. Emotional intelligence and the Trait Meta-Mood Scale: Relationships with empathy , attributional complexity, self-control, and responses to interpersonal conflicts. E-Journal of Applied Psychology 1, 1: 50--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. F. L. Geis and Tae H. Moon. 1981. Machiavellianism and deception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41, 4: 766--775.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. M. a. Goodrich, J. W. Crandall, and E. Barakova. 2013. Teleoperation and Beyond for Assistive Humanoid Robots. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics 9, 1: 175--226.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. James J Gross. 2002. Emotion regulation?: Affective , cognitive , and social consequences. 281--291.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Craig Haney, Curtis Banks, and Philip Zimbardo. 1973. Interpersonal dynamics in a stimulated prison. Journal of Criminology and Penology 1, October: 69--97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Pamela J. Hinds and Diane E. Bailey. 2003. Out of Sight, Out of Sync: Understanding Conflict in Distributed Teams. Organization Science 14, 6: 615--632. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Karen Horney. 1945. Our inner conflicts: A constructive theory of neurosis. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Daniel Howlader. 2011. Moral and ethical questions for robotics public policy. -- Journal of Science, Technology, Ethics, and Policy: 1--6. Retrieved from http://www.synesisjournal.com/vol2_g/2011.2_G1--6_Howlader_abstract.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Malte F. Jung, Nikolas Martelaro, and Pamela J. Hinds. 2015. Using Robots to Moderate Team Conflict. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction - HRI '15, 229--236. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Peter H. Jr. Kahn, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, et al. 2012. Do People Hold a Humanoid Robot Morally Accountable for the Harm It Causes? 33--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Peter H. Kahn, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, et al. 2015. Will People Keep the Secret of a Humanoid Robot? Human-Robot Interaction -, 173--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Peter H Kahn, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, et al. 2012. "Robovie, you'll have to go into the closet now": children's social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental psychology 48, 2: 303--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. J. F. Kelley. 1984. An iterative design methodology for user-friendly natural language office information applications. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 2, 1: 26--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Richard S Lazarus and Susan Folkman. 1984. Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. L. C. Lederman. 1992. Debriefing: Toward a Systematic Assessment of Theory and Practice. Simulation & Gaming 23, 2: 145--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. J. R. Lee and C. I. Nass. 2010. Trust in Computers: The Computers-Are-Social-Actors (CASA) Paradigm and Trustworthiness Perception in Human-Computer Communication. In Trust and Technology in a Ubiquitous Modern Environment: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives. IGI Global, 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Mk Lee, Jodi Forlizzi, and Sara Kiesler. 2012. Personalization in HRI: A longitudinal field experiment. Human-Robot Interaction, 319--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Rich Ling. 2002. The social juxtaposition of mobile telephone conversa- tions and public spaces. Conference on the Social Consequences of Mobile Telephones, July 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Alexandru Litoiu, Daniel Ullman, Jason Kim, and Brian Scassellati. 2015. Evidence that Robots Trigger a Cheating Detector in Humans. Human-Robot Interaction, 165--172. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. David D. Luxton. 2014. Recommendations for the ethical use and design of artificial intelligent care providers. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 62, 1: 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. MARGARET L. McLAUGHLIN and MICHAEL J. CODY. 1982. AWKWARD SILENCES: BEHAVIORAL ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE CONVERSATIONAL LAPSE. Human Communication Research 8, 4: 299--316.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. S Milgram. 1963. Behavioral Study of Obedience. Journal of abnormal psychology 67: 371--378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Judson Mills. 1976. A procedure for explaining experiments involving deception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2, 1: 3--13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Naoki Ohshima, Keita Kimijima, Junji Yamato, and Naoki Mukawa. 2015. A conversational robot with vocal and bodily fillers for recovering from awkward silence at turn-takings. International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, IEEE, 325--330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. J. M. Richards and James J. Gross. 1999. Composure at Any Cost? The Cognitive Consequences of Emotion Suppression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 25, 8: 1033--1044.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Laurel D. Riek. 2012. Wizard of Oz Studies in HRI: A Systematic Review and New Reporting Guidelines. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 1, 1: 119--136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Laurel D. Riek and Don Howard. 2014. A Code of Ethics for the Human-Robot Interaction Profession. We Robot Conference: 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Laurel D. Riek, Philip C. Paul, and Peter Robinson. 2010. When my robot smiles at me: Enabling human-robot rapport via real-time head gesture mimicry. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces 3, 1: 99--108.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Maha Salem, Gabriella Lakatos, Farshid Amirabdollahian, and Kerstin Dautenhahn. 2015. Would You Trust a (Faulty) Robot?: Effects of Error, Task Type and Personality on Human-Robot Cooperation and Trust. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction: 141--148. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Peter Salovey, John D Mayer, Susan Lee Goldman, Carolyn Turvey, and Tibor P Palfai. 1995. Emotional Attention, Clarity, and Repair: Exploring Emotional Intelligence Using the Trait Meta-Mood Scale. Emotion, Disclosure, and Health, 125--154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Stela H Seo, Denise Geiskkovitch, Masayuki Nakane, Corey King, and James E Young. 2015. Poor Thing?! Would You Feel Sorry for a Simulated Robot? A comparison of empathy toward a physical and a simulated robot. Human-Robot Interaction, 125--132. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Alessandro Settimi, Corrado Pavan, Valerio Varricchio, et al. 2014. A modular approach for remote operation of humanoid robots in search and rescue scenarios. Modelling and Simulation for Autonomous Systems (MESAS) 8906: 192--200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. E. Short, J. Hart, M. Vu, and B. Scassellati. 2010. No fair!! An interaction with a cheating robot. 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI): 219--226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Stevens S. Smith and Deborah Richardson. 1983. Amelioration of deception and harm in psychological research: The important role of debriefing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44, 5: 1075--1082.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. James E Young, Jayoung Sung, Amy Voida, et al. 2010. Evaluating Human-Robot Interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics 3, 1: 53--67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Philip G Zimbardo, Christina Maslach, Craig Haney, and Prologue G Philip Zimbardo. 1999. Reflections on the Stanford Prison Experiment: Genesis, Transformations, Consequences. In Obedience to Authority: Current Perspectives on the Milgram Paradigm. 193--237.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Wizard of Awwws: Exploring Psychological Impact on the Researchers in Social HRI Experiments

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

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

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      HRI '17: Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
      March 2017
      462 pages
      ISBN:9781450348850
      DOI:10.1145/3029798

      Copyright © 2017 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 ACM 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]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 6 March 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      HRI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate51of211submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate192of519submissions,37%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader