Search for: All records

As human-robot interactions become more social, a robot's personality plays an increasingly vital role in shaping user experience and its overall effectiveness. In this study, we examine the impact of three distinct robot personalities on user experiences during well-being exercises: a Baseline Personality that aligns with user expectations, a High Extraversion Personality, and a High Neuroticism Personality. These personalities were manifested through the robot's dialogue, which were generated using a large language model (LLM) guided by key behavioral characteristics from the Big 5 personality traits. In a between-subjects user study (N = 66), where each participant interacted with one distinct robot personality, we found that both the High Extraversion and High Neuroticism Robot Personalities significantly enhanced participants' emotional states (arousal, control, and valence). The High Extraversion Robot Personality was also rated as the most enjoyable to interact with. Additionally, evidence suggested that participants' personality traits moderated the effectiveness of specific robot personalities in eliciting positive outcomes from well-being exercises. Our findings highlight the potential benefits of designing robot personalities that deviate from users' expectations, thereby enriching human-robot interactions. 

Robots, particularly in service and companionship roles, must develop positive relationships with people they interact with regularly to be successful. These positive human-robot relationships can be characterized as establishing “rapport,” which indicates mutual understanding and interpersonal connection that form the groundwork for successful long-term human-robot interaction. However, the human-robot interaction research literature lacks scale instruments to assess human-robot rapport in a variety of situations. In this work, we developed the 18-item Connection-Coordination Rapport (CCR) Scale to measure human-robot rapport. We first ran Study 1 (N = 288) where online participants rated videos of human-robot interactions using a set of candidate items. Our Study 1 results showed the discovery of two factors in our scale, which we named “Connection” and “Coordination.” We then evaluated this scale by running Study 2 (N = 201) where online participants rated a new set of human-robot interaction videos with our scale and an existing rapport scale from virtual agents research for comparison. We also validated our scale by replicating a prior in-person human-robot interaction study, Study 3 (N = 44), and found that rapport is rated significantly greater when participants interacted with a responsive robot (responsive condition) as opposed to an unresponsive robot (unresponsive condition). Results from these studies demonstrate high reliability and validity for the CCR scale, which can be used to measure rapport in both first-person and third-person perspectives. We encourage the adoption of this scale in future studies to measure rapport in a variety of human-robot interactions. 

Despite advances in areas such as the personalization of robots, sustaining adoption of robots for long-term use in families remains a challenge. Recent studies have identified integrating robots into families’ routines and rituals as a promising approach to support long-term adoption. However, few studies explored the integration of robots into family routines and there is a gap in systematic measures to capture family preferences for robot integration. Building upon existing routine inventories, we developed Family-Robot Routines Inventory (FRRI), with 24 family routines and 24 child routine items, to capture parents’ attitudes toward and expectations from the integration of robotic technology into their family routines. Using this inventory, we collected data from 150 parents through an online survey. Our analysis indicates that parents had varying perceptions for the utility of integrating robots into their routines. For example, parents found robot integration to be more helpful in children’s individual routines, than to the collective routines of their families. We discuss the design implications of these preliminary findings, and how they may serve as a first step toward understanding the diverse challenges and demands of designing and integrating household robots for families.