不同機器人呈現形式對使用者互動行為及感受之探討

An Investigation of User Perception and Behavior for Various Types of Robotic Assistants

楊祐誠(Yu-Cheng Yang)

指導教授 ： 游曉貞

國立臺中科技大學/設計學院/多媒體設計系碩士班/碩士(2016年)

摘要

在現今科技進步飛快的時代，機器人已經儼然成為人們生活中的一部分，機器人應用的範圍也越加廣泛，而其中將機器人作為生活中各式不同的助理，並結合雲端網路應用於各種不同的裝置上更是一大趨勢。在近年來的人機互動研究領域中，有研究指出人對於具備有相同樣貌的實體機器人與虛擬代理人的反應會有所不同，因此本研究針對此議題進行探討，透過實驗設計，在個人健康管理的情境下，讓機器人作為受測者的健康夥伴，並給予受測者健康的建議，企圖找出以不同形式呈現的社交機器人與使用者互動時是否會造成使用者感受及行為上的差異，提供往後機器人開發或是研究上的設計建議。在本研究中，使用的機器人為Alpha 1S，機器人的角色設定為男性，受測者為20-30歲有使用科技產品經驗的人，實驗中機器人呈現形式分為三種：(1)實體機器人；(2)電視螢幕上的虛擬代理人；(3)手機螢幕上的虛擬代理人，共計有81名受測者隨機分配於各組並不重複進行實驗，以避免認知負荷。研究結果為下列四點：(1)受測者對於實體的機器人及大螢幕上呈現的虛擬代理人的動作有較清楚的理解及揭露較多的私人訊息，但大螢幕呈現與實體呈現並沒有差異、(2)受測者對於實體機器人有較正面的社交感受；(3)受測者較相信及遵守大螢幕上的虛擬代理人給予的建議及指令；(4)大螢幕上的虛擬代理人的可信度比小螢幕上的虛擬代理人高，但是小螢幕上的虛擬代理人給予人較多的社交性影響。

關鍵字

社交機器人 ； 機器人互動 ； 虛擬代理人 ； 奧茲巫師法

並列摘要

Today, the use of robotics has been widely applied to our lives. The robot has become an assistant for us in various ways. This utilization is specifically seen in health care applications. Recently, there has been research indicating that users will have different kinds of reactions when they are interacting with various types of robotic assistants, such as computer agents or physical robots. To help us understand the differences between users’ social interactions with an agent and a robot, this study focused on different types of Alpha 1S robots as health care partners. We experimentally compared users’ responses in a health interview with (a) a computer agent displayed either on a TV monitor or on an iPhone 6 plus screen, or (b) a physical robot in the same room. The study randomly examined eighty-one (81) participants. It did not duplicate any participant in any of the three conditions. This was done to avoid cognitive overload. The results revealed behavioral and attitudinal differences across these conditions. (1) When participants interacted with a physical robot or virtual agent on TV, they better understood the meaning of the robot's actions and disclosed more personal habits. But it was found that those two were statistically not significant. (2) The physical robot had more of a social impact than the virtual agent. (3) The virtual agent on TV encouraged more trust than the physical robot or the virtual agent on the phone. This trust more often led the participants to obey its commands and believe its advice. (4) The virtual agent on the phone showed a greater social influence than the virtual agent on TV, even though the virtual agent on TV led to greater trust.

並列關鍵字

Socially Robot ； Human Robot Interaction ； Virtual Agent ； The Wizard of Oz

參考文獻

2. Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1(1), 71-81.

6. Dautenhahn, K. (2007). Socially intelligent robots: dimensions of human–robot interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362(1480), 679-704.

10. Fasola, J., & Matarić, M. J. (2013). Socially assistive robot exercise coach: motivating older adults to engage in physical exercise. In Experimental Robotics, 463-479.

11. Ferber, J., Gutknecht, O., & Michel, F. (2003). From agents to organizations: an organizational view of multi-agent systems. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering IV, 214-230.

13. Guerin, B. (1986). Mere presence effects in humans: A review. Journal of experimental social psychology, 22(1), 38-77.