Although humanoid robots are being designed to assist people in various tasks, there remain gaps in our understanding of the perceptions that humanoid faces evoke in the user. Understanding user perceptions will enable design of robots suited for the target user group. We assessed younger and older adults’ preferences for robot appearance out of three levels of human-likeness. Preferences for robot appearance differed between younger and older age groups. A majority of older adults preferred a human appearance for their robot whereas the intermediate level of appearance (mixed human-robot) was least popular among them. Younger adults’ preferences were more distributed across the three levels of human-like appearances. Moreover, preferences for appearance depended on the robot task. The underlying reasons for task-specific preferences toward highly human-looking versus less human-looking robots are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarM.NetaM.LinzH. (2006). Very first impressions. Emotion6(2), 269-278.
2.
BlowM.DautenhahnK.ApplebyA.NehanivC. L.LeeD. (2006). The art of designing robot faces - dimensions for human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 331-332). Utah, USA.
3.
CzajaS.J.CharnessN.FiskA.D.HertzogC.NairS.N.RogersW.A.SharitJ. (2006). Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the Center for Research and Education on Aging and Technology Enhancement (CREATE). Psychological Aging, 21, 333-352.
4.
DavisF. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.
5.
EberhardtJ. L.DaviesP. G.Purdie-VaughnsV. J.JohnsonS. L. (2006). Looking deathworthy: Perceived stereotypicality of Black defendants predicts capital-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 17, 382–386.
6.
GoetzJ.KieslerS.PowersA. (2003). Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interaction Communication (pp. 55-60). Millbrae, CA.
7.
MacDormanK. F. (2006). Subjective ratings of robot video clips for human likeness, familiarity, and eeriness: An exploration of the uncanny valley. ICCS/CogSci-2006 Long Symposium: Toward Social Mechanisms of Android Science (pp. 26–29). Vancouver, Canada.
8.
MacDormanK. F.IshiguroH. (2006). The uncanny advantage of using androids in social and cognitive science research. Interaction Studies, 7(3), 297–337.
9.
MasipJ.GarridoE.HerreroC. (2004). Facial appearance and impressions of credibility: The effects of facial babyishness and age on person perception. International Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 276-289.
10.
MoriM. (1970). Bukimi no tani, Energy7(4), 33–35. English translation by MacDormanK.F.MinatoT. (2005). Proceedings of the Humanoids-2005 Workshop: Views of the Uncanny Valley, Tsukuba, Japan.
11.
PrakashA. (2013). Understanding younger and older adults’ perceptions of humanoid robots: Effects of facial appearance and task. (Unpublished master’s thesis). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
12.
PrakashA.BeerJ. M.DeyleT.SmarrC.-A.ChenT. L.PrakashA.MitznerT. L.KempC. C.RogersW. A. (2013). Older adults’ medication management in the home: How can robots help?Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’13; pp. 283-290). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.
13.
RiggioR. E.WidamanK. F.TuckerJ. S.SalinasC. (1991). Beauty is more than skin deep: Components of attractiveness. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 423-439.
14.
SmarrC.-A.PrakashA.BeerJ. M.MitznerT. L.KempC. C.RogersW. A. (2012). Older adults’ preferences for and acceptance of robot assistance for everyday living tasks. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 56th Annual Meeting (pp. 153-157). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
15.
TodorovA.MandisodzaA. N.GorenA.HallC. C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623-1626. doi: 10.1126/science.1110589
16.
WaltersM. L.SyrdalD. S.DautenhahnK.BoekhorstR.KoayK. L. (2008). Avoiding the uncanny valley – robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Journal of Autonomous Robots, 24(2), 159-178.
17.
ZebrowitzL. A.MontepareJ. M. (2008). Social psychological face perception: Why appearance matters. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1497-1517.
18.
ZebrowitzL. A.RhodesG. (2004). Sensitivity to “bad genes” and the anomalous face overgeneralization effect: Cue validity, cue utilization, and accuracy in judging intelligence and health. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 28, 167–185.
