Positive Emotions,More Than Anxiety or Other Negative Emotions,Predict Willingness to Interact With Robots

Abstract

Like early work on human intergroup interaction, previous research on people’s willingness to interact with robots has focused mainly on effects of anxiety. However, existing findings suggest that other negative emotions as well as some positive emotions also have effects. This article systematically examines the roles of positive and negative emotions in predicting willingness to interact with robots, using an integrative analysis of data across five studies that use diverse interaction conditions and several types of robots. We hypothesize and find that positive emotions account for more variance than negative emotions. Practically, the findings suggest new strategies for interventions, aimed at increasing positive emotions to increase willingness to engage in intergroup interaction. No existing work has examined whether positive emotions are stronger predictors than negative emotions for willingness for human intergroup interaction, an important topic for future research.

Keywords

emotions intergroup interaction human–robot interaction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aron

E. N.

(1997). Self-expansion motivation and including other in the self. In Duck

(Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions (pp. 251–270). John Wiley.

Barlow

F. K.

Hornsey

M. J.

Hayward

L. E.

Houkamau

C. A.

Kang

Milojev

Sibley

C. G.

(2019). Why do we hold mixed emotions about racial out-groups? A case for affect matching. Psychological Science, 30, 917–929. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619844269

Bates

Maechler

Bolker

Walker

(2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01

Betancourt

. (2017). A conceptual introduction to Hamiltonian Monte Carlo. https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.02434

Binder

Zagefka

Brown

Funke

Kessler

Mummendey

. . . Leyens

(2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 843–856. https://doi.org./10.1037/a0013470

Bolker

(2019, May 28). GLMM FAQ. https://bbolker.github.io/mixedmodels-misc/glmmFAQ.html#singular-models-random-effect-variances-estimated-as-zero-or-correlations-estimated-as

Brauer

Curtin

J. J.

(2017). Linear mixed-effects models and the analysis of nonindependent data: A unified framework to analyze categorical and continuous independent variables that vary within-subjects and/or within-items. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000159

Broadbent

(2017). Interactions with robots: The truths we reveal about ourselves. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 627–652. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958

Burns

K. C.

Isbell

L. M.

Tyler

J. M.

(2008). Suppressing emotions toward stereotyped targets: The impact on willingness to engage in contact. Social Cognition, 26(3), 276–287. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.008.26.3.276

10.

Cottrell

C. A.

Neuberg

S. L.

(2005). Different emotional reactions to different groups: A sociofunctional threat-based approach to “prejudice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(5), 770–789. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.770

11.

Curran

P. J.

Hussong

A. M.

(2009). Integrative data analysis: The simultaneous analysis of multiple data sets. Psychological Methods, 14(2), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015914

12.

de Graaf

M. M.

Allouch

S. B

. (2013). Exploring influencing variables for the acceptance of social robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 61(12), 1476–1486.

13.

Esses

Dovidio

J. F.

(2002). The role of emotions in determining willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1202–1214.

14.

Eyssel

Hegel

(2012). (S)he’s got the look: Gender stereotyping of robots. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(9), 2213–2230.

15.

Eyssel

Kuchenbrandt

(2012). Social categorization of social robots: Anthropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4), 724–731.

16.

Greenwald

A. G.

Pettigrew

T. F.

(2014). With malice toward none and charity for some: Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. American Psychologist, 69(7), 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036056

17.

Halperin

(2013). Emotion, emotion regulation, and conflict resolution. Emotion Review, 6(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073913491844

18.

Halperin

Cohen-Chen

Goldenberg

(2014). Indirect emotion regulation in intractable conflicts: A new approach to conflict resolution. European Review of Social Psychology, 25(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2014.923155

19.

Halperin

Porat

Tamir

Gross

J. J.

(2013). Can emotion regulation change political attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory to the field. Psychological Science, 24(1), 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612452572

20.

Heerink

Krose

Wielinga

Evers

(2008, March 12–15). Enjoyment, intention to use and actual use of a conversational robot by elderly people [Paper presentation]. 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’08), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

21.

C. C.

MacDorman

K. F.

Pramono

Z. D.

(2008, March 12–15). Human emotion and the uncanny valley: A GLM, MDS, and isomap analysis of robot video ratings [Paper presentation]. 2008

3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’08)

Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

22.

Hodson

Crisp

R. J.

Meleady

Earle

(2018). Intergroup contact as an agent of cognitive liberalization. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(5), 523–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617752324

23.

Judd

Westfall

Kenny

D. A.

(2017). Experiments with more than one random factor: Designs, analytic models, and statistical power. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 601–625. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033702

24.

Kenny

D. A.

Judd

C. M.

(2019). The unappreciated heterogeneity of effect sizes: Implications for power, precision, planning of research, and replication. Psychological Methods, 24(5), 578–589.

25.

LeDoux

(2012). Rethinking the emotional brain. Neuron, 73, 653–676.

26.

MacDorman

K. F.

Entezari

S. O.

(2015). Individual differences predict sensitivity to the uncanny valley. Interaction Studies: Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems, 16, 141–172.

27.

Mackie

D. M.

Smith

E. R.

(2018). Intergroup emotions theory: Production, regulation, and modification of group-based emotions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 58, 1–69.

28.

March

D. S.

Gaertner

Olson

M. A.

(2017). In harm’s way: On preferential response to threatening stimuli. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 43(11), 1519–1529. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217722558

29.

Miller

D. A.

Smith

E. R.

Mackie

D. M.

(2004). Effects of intergroup contact and political predispositions on prejudice: Role of intergroup emotions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 7(3), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430204046109

30.

Mori

MacDorman

K. F.

Kageki

(2012). The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 19, 98–100.

31.

Muth

Oravecz

Gabry

(2018). User-friendly Bayesian regression modeling: A tutorial with rstanarm and shinystan. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 14(2), 99–119.

32.

Nomura

Kanda

Suzuki

(2006). Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human–robot interaction. AI & Society, 20(2), 138–150.

33.

Öhman

Mineka

(2001). Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychological Review, 108, 483–522.

34.

Paolini

Harwood

Hewstone

Neumann

D. L.

(2018). Seeking and avoiding intergroup contact: Future frontiers of research on building social integration. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12, Article e12422. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12422

35.

Pettigrew

T. F.

(1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85.

36.

Pettigrew

T. F.

Tropp

L. R.

(2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. doi:http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.75

37.

Pettigrew

T. F.

Tropp

(2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. Psychology Press.

38.

Plant

E. A.

(2004). Responses to interracial interactions over time. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 30(11), 1458–1471. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204264244

39.

Plant

E. A.

Butz

D. A.

Tartakovsky

(2008). Interethnic interactions: Expectancies, emotions, and behavioral intentions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11(4), 555–574. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430208095827

40.

Reeves

Nass

(1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media. Cambridge University Press.

41.

Reissman

Aron

Bergen

M. R.

(1993). Shared activities and marital satisfaction: Causal direction and self-expansion versus boredom. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(2), 243–254.

42.

Seger

C. R.

Banerji

Park

S. H.

Smith

E. R.

Mackie

D. M.

(2017). Specific emotions as mediators of the effect of intergroup contact on prejudice: Findings across multiple participant and target groups. Cognition and Emotion, 31(5), 923–936. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1182893

43.

Stephan

W. G.

Stephan

C. W.

(1985). Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985.tb01134.x

44.

Takayanagi

Kirita

Shibata

(2014). Comparison of verbal and emotional responses of elderly people with mild/moderate dementia and those with severe dementia in responses to seal robot, PARO. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 6, Article 257.

45.

Wang

Lilienfeld

S. O.

Rochat

(2015). The uncanny valley: Existence and explanations. Review of General Psychology, 19, 393–407.

46.

Weaver

C. N.

(2008). Social distance as a measure of prejudice among ethnic groups in the united states. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(3), 779–795. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00326.x

47.

Webb

T. L.

Sheeran

(2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 132(2), 249–268.

48.

Weiss

Wurhofer

Tscheligi

(2009). “I love this dog”—Children’s emotional attachment to the robotic dog AIBO. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 243–248.

49.

Zlotowski

J. A.

Sumioka

Nishio

Glas

D. F.

Bartneck

Ishiguro

(2015). Persistence of the uncanny valley: The influence of repeated interactions and a robot’s attitude on its perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 883.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB