This research explores the public's perceptions of the appropriateness of the use of robots in museums and galleries. Using data from an international survey of 1589 participants, the data show that the perceived appropriateness of robot implementation in museums and galleries is driven largely by perceptions of the usefulness and emotional skills of robotic technologies, and their perceived advantages compared to human employees. Additionally, the findings suggest that the general attitudes towards service robots in tourism shape the attitudes towards robots in museums and galleries in particular. Furthermore, the findings reveal that the demographic characteristics of visitors are not related to their perceptions of robots in museums and galleries.
BurgardW.CremersA. B.FoxD.HähnelD.LakemeyerG.SchulzD.SteinerW., & ThrunS. (1999). Experiences with an interactive museum tour-guide robot. Artificial Intelligence, 114(1–2), 3–55.
2.
ChuahS. H. W., & YuJ. (2021). The future of service: The power of emotion in human–robot interaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102551.
3.
de KervenoaelR., HasanR., SchwobA., & GohE. (2020). Leveraging human–robot interaction in hospitality services: Incorporating the role of perceived value, empathy, and information sharing into visitors’ intentions to use social robots. Tourism Management, 78, 104042.
4.
Del DuchettoF., BaxterP., & HanheideM. (2019, October 14–18). Lindsey the tour guide robot-usage patterns in a museum long-term deployment. Paper presented at the 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), New Delhi, India.
5.
Del VacchioE., LaddagaC., & BifulcoF. (2020, August 31). Social robots as a tool to involve student in museum edutainment programs. Paper presented at the 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Naples, Italy.
6.
FaberF.BennewitzM.EppnerC.GorogA.GonsiorC.JohoD.SchreiberM., & BehnkeS. (2009, September 27). The humanoid museum tour guide Robotinho. Paper presented at the RO-MAN 2009-The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Toyama, Japan.
7.
Fuentes-MoraledaL.Lafuente-IbañezC. Fernandez Alvarez, N., & Villace-Molinero, T. (2021). Willingness to accept social robots in museums: An exploratory factor analysis according to visitor profile. Library Hi Tech. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-07-2020–0180
8.
GehleR.PitschK.DankertT., & WredeS. (2017). How to open an interaction between robot and museum visitor? Strategies to establish a focused encounter in HRI. Paper presented at the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 6–9 March 2017, Vienna, Austria.
9.
HudsonJ.OrviskaM., & HunadyJ. (2017). People's attitudes to robots in caring for the elderly. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9(2), 199–210.
10.
IioT.SatakeS.KandaT.HayashiK.FerreriF., & HagitaN. (2020). Human-like guide robot that proactively explains exhibits. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12 (2), 549–566.
11.
IvanovS. (2021). Robonomics: The rise of the automated economy. ROBONOMICS: The Journal of the Automated Economy, 1, 11.
12.
IvanovS., & WebsterC. (2019). Perceived appropriateness and intention to use service robots in tourism. In J. Pesonen & J. Neidhardt (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in Tourism2019. Proceedings of the International Conference in Nicosia, Cyprus (pp. 237–248), Cham: Springer.
13.
IvanovS.WebsterC., & BerezinaK. (2017). Adoption of robots and service automation by tourism and hospitality companies. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 27/28, 1501–1517.
14.
IvanovS.WebsterC., & GarenkoA. (2018). Young Russian adults’ attitudes towards the potential use of robots in hotels. Technology in Society, 55, 24–32.
15.
KimM. G.LeeH.LeeJ.KwakS. S., & JooY. (2015, November 23–25). Effectiveness and service quality of robot museum through visitors experience: A case study of RoboLife Museum in South Korea. Paper presented at the 2015 International Symposium on Micro-Nanomechatronics and Human Science (MHS), Nagoya, Japan.
16.
NomuraT.TasakiT.KandaT.ShiomiM.IshiguroH., & HagitaN. (2006). Questionnaire-based social research on opinions of Japanese visitors for communication robots at an exhibition. AI and Society, 21(1–2), 167–183.
17.
NourbakhshI. R.KunzC., & WillekeT. (2003). The mobot museum robot installations: A five year experiment. Proceedings 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2003), 4, 3636–3641. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2003.1249720
18.
NowackiM., & KruczekZ. (2021). Experience marketing at Polish museums and visitor attractions: The co-creation of visitor experiences, emotions and satisfaction. Museum Management and Curatorship, 36(1), 62–81.
19.
PitschK.WredeS.SeeleJ. C., & SüssenbachL. (2011, March 6–9). Attitude of German museum visitors towards an interactive art guide robot. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Human–Robot Interaction, Lausanne, Switzerland.
SeyitoğluF. (2021). Automation vs authenticity in services. ROBONOMICS: The Journal of the Automated Economy, 2, 20.
22.
Stock-HomburgR. (2021). Survey of emotions in human–robot interactions: Perspectives from robotic psychology on 20 years of research. International Journal of Social Robotics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00778-6
23.
ThrunS.BeetzM.BennewitzM.BurgardW.CremersA. B.DellaertF.FoxD.HähnelD.RosenbergC.RoyN.SchulteJ., & SchulzD. (2000). Probabilistic algorithms and the interactive museum tour-guide robot Minerva. International Journal of Robotics Research, 19(11), 972–999.
24.
TungV. W. S., & AuN. (2018). Exploring customer experiences with robotics in hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(7), 2680–2697.
25.
TuomiA.TussyadiahI. P., & StienmetzJ. (2021). Applications and implications of service robots in hospitality. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 62 (2), 232–247.
26.
TussyadiahI.ZachF., & WangJ. (2017). Attitudes toward autonomous on demand mobility system: The case of self-driving taxi. In ScheggR. & StanglB. (Eds.), Information and communication technologies in Tourism 2017. Proceedings of the International Conference in Rome, Italy (pp. 755–766). Cham: Springer.
27.
VelentzaA. M.HeinkeD., & WyattJ. (2020). Museum robot guides or conventional audio guides? An experimental study. Advanced Robotics, 34(24), 1571–1580.
28.
VenkateshV., & DavisF. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
29.
VirtoN. R., & LópezM. F. B. (2019). Robots, artificial intelligence, and service automation to the core: Remastering experiences at museums. In IvanovS. & WebsterC. (Eds.), Robots, artificial intelligence, and service automation in travel, tourism and hospitality (pp. 239–253). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.
30.
WebsterC. (2021). Demography as a driver of Robonomics. ROBONOMICS: The Journal of the Automated Economy, 1, 12.
31.
WebsterC., & IvanovS. (2021). Tourists’ perceptions of robots in passenger transport. Technology in Society, 67, 101720.
32.
ZhongL.ZhangX.RongJ.ChanH. K.XiaoJ., & KongH. (2021). Construction and empirical research on acceptance model of service robots applied in hotel industry. Industrial Management and Data Systems, 121(6), 1325–1352.
