1,643 research outputs found

    The Role of Personality Factors and Empathy in the Acceptance and Performance of a Social Robot for Psychometric Evaluations

    Get PDF
    Research and development in socially assistive robotics have produced several novel applications in the care of senior people. However, some are still unexplored such as their use as psychometric tools allowing for a quick and dependable evaluation of human usersโ€™ intellectual capacity. To fully exploit the application of a social robot as a psychometric tool, it is necessary to account for the usersโ€™ factors that might influence the interaction with a robot and the evaluation of user cognitive performance. To this end, we invited senior participants to use a prototype of a robot-led cognitive test and analyzed the influence of personality traits and userโ€™s empathy on the cognitive performance and technology acceptance. Results show a positive influence of a personality trait, the โ€œopenness to experienceโ€, on the human-robot interaction, and that other factors, such as anxiety, trust, and intention to use, are influencing technology acceptance and correlate the evaluation by psychometric tests

    What do humans feel with mistreated humans, animals, robots and objects? Exploring the role of cognitive empathy

    Get PDF
    The aim of this paper is to present a study in which we compare the degree of empathy that a convenience sample of university students expressed with humans, animals, robots and objects. The present study broadens the spectrum of elements eliciting empathy that has been previously explored while at the same time comparing different facets of empathy. Here we used video clips of mistreated humans, animals, robots, and objects to elicit empathic reactions and to measure attributed emotions. The use of such a broad spectrum of elements allowed us to infer the role of different features of the selected elements, specifically experience (how much the element is able to understand the events of the environment) and degree of anthropo-/zoomorphization. The results show that participants expressed empathy differently with the various social actors being mistreated. A comparison between the present results and previous results on vicarious feelings shows that congruence between self and other experience was not always held, and it was modulated by familiarity with robotic artefacts of daily usage

    Does the personality of consumers influence the assessment of the experience of interaction with social robots?

    Get PDF
    In recent years, in response to the effects of Covid-19, there has been an increase in the use of social robots in service organisations, as well as in the number of interactions between consumers and robots. However, it is not clear how consumers are valuing these experiences or what the main drivers that shape them are. Furthermore, it is an open research question whether these experiences undergone by consumers can be affected by their own personality. This study attempts to shed some light on these questions and, to do so, an experiment is proposed in which a sample of 378 participants evaluate a simulated front-office service experience delivered by a social robot. The authors investigate the underlying process that explains the experience and find that cognitive-functional factors, emphasising efficiency, have practically the same relevance as emotional factors, emphasising stimulation. In addition, this research identifies the personality traits of the participants and explores their moderating role in the evaluation of the experience. The results reveal that each personality trait, estimated between high and low poles, generates different responses in the evaluation of the experience

    Does the personality of consumers influence the assessment of the experience of interaction with social robots?

    Get PDF
    In recent years, in response to the effects of Covid-19, there has been an increase in the use of social robots in service organisations, as well as in the number of interactions between consumers and robots. However, it is not clear how consumers are valuing these experiences or what the main drivers that shape them are. Furthermore, it is an open research question whether these experiences undergone by consumers can be affected by their own personality. This study attempts to shed some light on these questions and, to do so, an experiment is proposed in which a sample of 378 participants evaluate a simulated front-office service experience delivered by a social robot. The authors investigate the underlying process that explains the experience and find that cognitive-functional factors, emphasising efficiency, have practically the same relevance as emotional factors, emphasising stimulation. In addition, this research identifies the personality traits of the participants and explores their moderating role in the evaluation of the experience. The results reveal that each personality trait, estimated between high and low poles, generates different responses in the evaluation of the experience.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

    Shopping with Voice Assistants: How Empathy Affects Individual and Family Decision-Making Outcomes

    Full text link
    Artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled voice assistants (VAs) such as Amazon Alexa increasingly assist shopping decisions and exhibit empathic behavior. The advancement of empathic AI raises concerns about machines nudging consumers into purchasing undesired or unnecessary products. Yet, it is unclear how the machineโ€™s empathic behavior affects consumer responses and decision-making outcomes during voice-enabled shopping. This article draws from the service robot acceptance model (sRAM) and social response theory (SRT) and presents an individual-session experiment where families (vs. individuals) complete actual shopping tasks using an ad-hoc Alexa app featuring high (vs. standard) empathic capabilities. We apply the experimental conditions as moderators to the structural model, bridging selected functional, social-emotional, and relational variables. Our framework collocates affective empathy, explicates the bases of consumersโ€™ beliefs, and predicts behavioral outcomes. Findings demonstrate (i) an increase in consumersโ€™ perceptions, beliefs, and adoption intentions with empathic Alexa, (ii) a positive response to empathic Alexa holding constant in family settings, and (iii) an interaction effect only on the functional model dimensions whereby families show greater responses to empathic Alexa while individuals to standard Alexa

    Examining Social Robot Acceptability for Older Adults and People with Dementia

    Get PDF
    Social robots that aim to support the independence and wellbeing of older adults and people with dementia are being introduced into dementia care settings. However, the acceptability of robots varies greatly between people and the rate that robots are deployed into practice is currently low. This chapter defines robot acceptability and provides an overview of theoretical technology acceptance models. It reviews the empirical literature and identifies the individual and contextual factors that impact acceptability in relation to the needs of older adults and people with dementia, focusing on what potential robot users need to motivate them to accept robots into their everyday lives. Then the literature is discussed in the light of current discourses in gerontology, recommending what is needed to increase the acceptability of robots. The capacity of robots, to communicate in a human-like way needs to increase and robots need to be designed with in-depth end-user collaboration, to be person-centred and deployed in ways that enhance the strengths of people with dementia. Guidance for good practice in participatory design is provided. Longitudinal research that uses triangulated data from multiple sources. is recommended to identify the needs of individuals, significant others, and wider contextual factors

    The Impact of Hotel Service Robot Appearance and Service Attributes on Customer Experience

    Get PDF
    In the past decade, an increasing discussion has taken place regarding the employment of hotel service robots. One critical issue is the impact service robots exhibit on customer experience. However, most of the existing studies focus on service robotsโ€™ technical functions or customerโ€™s adoption behavior instead of customersโ€™ psychological or attitudinal reactions toward the robot. Meanwhile, the emergence of humanoid robots has raised great attention from both researchers and industry practitioners. Humanlike features (e.g. facial expressions, emotions, and motions) inherently affect customer experience in a hotel environment. Nevertheless, limited literature exists in incorporating service robotsโ€™ anthropomorphism and service attributes into customer experience and perceived brand equity. Not many studies have included both the service robotsโ€™ traits and customersโ€™ personality traits when assessing customer experience. Therefore, the purpose of the current study is to explore and understand the impact of service robotsโ€™ appearance, service efficiency, and service customization on customer experience interacting with the service robot in the context of a hotel front desk check-in service. Customersโ€™ personality traits such as robot anxiety, technology readiness, and self-image congruity are also taken into consideration. This study also examines the influence of service robotsโ€™ appearance and service attributes on hotel customersโ€™ perceptions toward the hotel brand equity. The current study used experiments and online surveys to test the theoretical model and the perception changes toward the hotel brand equity. Two samples of 220 and 161 hotel customers who have completed the check-in services in person in the past 12 months were recruited for Study 1 and Study 2, respectively. Pilot studies were conducted, and hypothetical scenarios were embedded in the online surveys. The results showed that hotel service robotsโ€™ appearance (extremely humanoid vs. humanoid vs. non-humanoid) did not lead to different customersโ€™ experiences interacting with the service robot. Service efficiency was a significant factor while service customization was not in affecting customer experiences. Customersโ€™ levels of technology readiness and self-image congruity exerted significant impacts on customer experiences. Moreover, customers did not show obvious perception changes before and after interacting with the hypothetical service robot. Theoretical and practical contributions were discussed

    ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ์˜ ์†Œ์…œ AI ๊ฐœ์ธ๋น„์„œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์‚ฐ์—…๊ณตํ•™๊ณผ, 2022.2. ์œค๋ช…ํ™˜.This dissertation aims to propose a user evaluation model to evaluate social AI personal assistants in the early stage of product development. Due to the rapid development of personal devices, data generated from personal devices are increasing explosively, and various personal AI services and products using these data are being launched. However, compared to the interest in AI personal assistant products, its market is still immature. In this case, it is important to understand consumer expectations and perceptions deeply and develop a product that can satisfy them to spread the product and allow general consumers to easily accept the product promptly. Accordingly, this dissertation proposes and validates a user evaluation model that can be used in the early stage of product development. Prior to proposing this methodology, main characteristics of social AI personal assistants, the importance of user evaluation in the early stage of product development and the limitations of the existing user evaluation model were investigated in Chapter 2. Various technology acceptance models and evaluation models for social AI personal assistant products have been proposed, evaluation models that can be applied in the initial stage of product development were insufficient, however. Moreover, it was found that commonly used evaluation measures for assessment of hedonic value were much fewer compared to measures for utilitarian value. These were used as starting points of this dissertation. In Chapter 3, the evaluation measures used in previous studies related to social AI personal assistant were collected and carefully reviewed. Through systematic review of 40 studies, the evaluation measures used in the past and limitation of related research were investigated. As a result, it was found that it was not easy to develop a prototype for evaluation, so it was possible to make the most of the products that have already been commercialized. In addition, all evaluation items used in previous studies were collected and used as the basis for the evaluation model to be proposed later. As a result of the analysis, considering the purpose of the social AI personal assistant, the role as supporting the user emotionally through social interaction with the user is important, but it was found that the evaluation measures related to hedonic value that are commonly used were still insufficient. In Chapter 4, evaluation measures that can be used in the initial stage of product development for social AI personal assistant were selected. Selected evaluation measures were used to evaluate three types of social robots and relationship among evaluation factors were induced through this evaluation. A process was proposed to understand to various opinions related to social robots and to derive evaluation items, and a case study was conducted in which a total of 230 people evaluated three social robots concept images using the evaluation items finally selected through this process. As a result, it is shown that consumersโ€™ attitude toward products was built through the utilitarian dimension and the hedonic dimension. In addition, there is positive relationship between ease of use and utility in the utilitarian dimension, and among aesthetic pleasure, attractiveness of personality, affective value in the hedonic dimension. Moreover, it is confirmed that the evaluation model derived from this study showed superior explanatory power compared to the previously proposed technology acceptance model. In Chapter 5, the model was validated again by applying the evaluation measure and the relationship among evaluation factors derived in Chapter 4 to other products. 100 UX experts with expertise in the field of social AI personal assistants and 100 users who use the voice assistant service often, watched two concept videos of the voice assistant service to help users in the onboarding situation of mobile phones and evaluated these concepts. As a result of the evaluation, there is no significant difference in the evaluation results between the UX expert and the real user group, so the structural equation model analysis was conducted using all the data obtained from the UX expert and the real user group. As a result, results similar to those in Chapter 4 are obtained, and it is expected that the model could be generalized to social AI personal assistant products and applied for future research. This dissertation proposes evaluation measure and relationship among evaluation factors that can be applied when conducting user evaluation in the initial stage of social AI personal assistant development. In addition, case studies using social AI personal assistant products and services were conducted to validate it. With the findings of this study, it is expected that researchers who need to conduct user evaluation to clarify product concepts in the early stages of product development will be able to apply evaluation measures effectively. It is expected that the significance of this dissertation will become clearer if further research is conducted comparing the finished product of social AI personal assistants with the video type stimulus in the early stage of development.๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์€ ์ตœ๊ทผ ๋น ๋ฅด๊ฒŒ ๋ฐœ์ „ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” social AI personal assistant์˜ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์— ํ™œ์šฉ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜๊ณ  ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ ๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ฐœ์ธ ๋””๋ฐ”์ด์Šค์˜ ๋ฐœ๋‹ฌ๋กœ ์ธํ•ด, ๊ฐ ๋””๋ฐ”์ด์Šค์—์„œ ์ƒ์„ฑ๋˜๋Š” ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๊ฐ€ ํญ๋ฐœ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๊ณ , ์ด๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ ๊ฐœ์ธ์šฉ AI ์„œ๋น„์Šค ๋ฐ ์ œํ’ˆ์ด ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์ œ์•ˆ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ ๊ทธ ๊ด€์‹ฌ์— ๋น„ํ•ด, social AI personal assistant ์ œํ’ˆ์˜ ์‹ค์ œ ์‹œ์žฅ์€ ์•„์ง ์„ฑ์ˆ™ํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์ด๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ƒํ™ฉ์—์„œ ์ œํ’ˆ์„ ๋น ๋ฅด๊ฒŒ ํ™•์‚ฐ์‹œํ‚ค๊ณ  ์ผ๋ฐ˜ ์†Œ๋น„์ž๋“ค์ด ์‰ฝ๊ฒŒ ์ œํ’ˆ์„ ์ˆ˜์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๊ฒŒ ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š”, ์†Œ๋น„์ž์˜ ๊ธฐ๋Œ€์™€ ์ธ์‹์„ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํžˆ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๊ณ  ๊ทธ๋ฅผ ์ถฉ์กฑ์‹œํ‚ฌ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ œํ’ˆ์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค. ์ด์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ œํ’ˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์— ํ™œ์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๊ณ  ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ ๊ฐ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋„์ถœํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ชฉํ‘œ๋กœ ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋จผ์ € 2์žฅ์—์„œ๋Š” social AI personal assistant์˜ ํŠน์ง•, ์ œํ’ˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง€๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€์˜ ์ค‘์š”์„ฑ ๋ฐ ๊ธฐ์กด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ํ•œ๊ณ„์ ์„ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ธฐ์กด์— ๊ธฐ์ˆ  ์ˆ˜์šฉ ๋ชจ๋ธ ๋ฐ AI personal assistant ์ œํ’ˆ์˜ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ๋“ค์ด ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์ œ์•ˆ๋˜์–ด ์™”์œผ๋‚˜, ์ œํ’ˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์— ํ™œ์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์€ ๋ถ€์กฑํ•˜์˜€๊ณ , ์ œํ’ˆ ์ „๋ฐ˜์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ๋ถ€์žฌ๋กœ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ๊ธฐ์กด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ์ด์ƒ์˜ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ๊ฒฐํ•ฉ, ์ˆ˜์ •ํ•˜์—ฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. 3์žฅ์—์„œ๋Š” AI personal assistant ๊ด€๋ จ ๊ธฐ์กด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ํ™œ์šฉ๋œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ๊ฒ€ํ† ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด 40๊ฐœ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐํ•˜์—ฌ, ๊ธฐ์กด์— ํ™œ์šฉ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์˜ ์ข…๋ฅ˜ ๋ฐ ํ•œ๊ณ„์ ์„ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ํ”„๋กœํ† ํƒ€์ž… ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ์ด ์‰ฝ์ง€ ์•Š๊ธฐ์— ์ด๋ฏธ ์ƒ์šฉํ™”๋œ ์ œํ’ˆ๋“ค์„ ์ตœ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ œํ’ˆ ์ „๋ฐ˜์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ ์‚ฌ๋ก€๋Š” ๋ถ€์กฑํ•จ์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์กด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ๋ชจ๋‘ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ ๋ฐ ์ •๋ฆฌํ•˜์—ฌ ์ดํ›„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•  ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์˜ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ž๋ฃŒ๋กœ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ถ„์„ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, social AI personal assistant์˜ ๋ชฉ์ ์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด๋ณด์•˜์„ ๋•Œ, ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž์™€์˜ ์‚ฌํšŒ์  ์ธํ„ฐ๋ž™์…˜์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž์˜ ๊ฐ์ •์ ์ธ ๋ฉด์„ ์ฑ„์›Œ์ฃผ๋Š” ์—ญํ• ์ด ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ, ๊ณตํ†ต์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฐ์ •์  ๊ฐ€์น˜ ๊ด€๋ จ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์ด ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. 4์žฅ์—์„œ๋Š” social AI personal assistant ์ œํ’ˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ ํ™œ์šฉ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ ๋ฐ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๊ณ , ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ social robots์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•œ ๋’ค ์ด๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ ๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋„์ถœํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. Social robots ๊ด€๋ จ ์˜๊ฒฌ์„ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์ฒญ์ทจํ•˜๊ณ  ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ๋„์ถœํ•˜๋Š” ํ”„๋กœ์„ธ์Šค๋ฅผ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋ณธ ํ”„๋กœ์„ธ์Šค๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ตœ์ข… ์„ ์ •๋œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ์„ ์ด์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ, ์ด 230๋ช…์ด ์„ธ ๊ฐ€์ง€ social robots ์ปจ์…‰ ์˜์ƒ์„ ํ‰๊ฐ€ํ•˜๋Š” ์‚ฌ๋ก€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ, ์ œํ’ˆ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์†Œ๋น„์ž ํƒœ๋„๋Š” Utilitarian dimension๊ณผ Hedonic dimension์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ํ˜•์„ฑ๋˜์—ˆ๊ณ , Utilitarian dimension ๋‚ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ ๋ฐ ์ œํ’ˆ ํšจ์šฉ์„ฑ, Hedonic dimension์— ํฌํ•จ๋˜๋Š” ์‹ฌ๋ฏธ์  ๋งŒ์กฑ๋„, ์„ฑ๊ฒฉ์˜ ๋งค๋ ฅ๋„, ๊ฐ์„ฑ์  ๊ฐ€์น˜ ๊ฐ๊ฐ์€ ์„œ๋กœ ๊ธ์ •์ ์ธ ์ƒ๊ด€๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ์ง€๋‹˜์„ ์•Œ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ๊ธฐ์กด์— ์ œ์•ˆ๋œ ๊ธฐ์ˆ  ์ˆ˜์šฉ ๋ชจ๋ธ ๋Œ€๋น„ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ๋„์ถœํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์ด ์šฐ์ˆ˜ํ•œ ์„ค๋ช…๋ ฅ์„ ๋ณด์ž„์„ ํ™•์ธํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. 5์žฅ์—์„œ๋Š” 4์žฅ์—์„œ ๋„์ถœ๋œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ํƒ€ ์ œํ’ˆ์— ์ ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ ๋‹ค์‹œ ํ•œ๋ฒˆ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ถ„์•ผ์— ์ „๋ฌธ์„ฑ์„ ์ง€๋‹Œ UX ์ „๋ฌธ๊ฐ€ 100๋ช… ๋ฐ ์Œ์„ฑ ๋น„์„œ ์„œ๋น„์Šค๋ฅผ ์‹ค์ œ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ์‹ค์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž 100๋ช…์ด, ํœด๋Œ€ํฐ ์˜จ๋ณด๋”ฉ ์ƒํ™ฉ์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋ฅผ ๋„์™€์ฃผ๋Š” ์Œ์„ฑ ๋น„์„œ ์„œ๋น„์Šค์˜ ์ปจ์…‰ ์˜์ƒ ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€๋ฅผ ๋ณด๊ณ  ์ปจ์…‰์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ UX ์ „๋ฌธ๊ฐ€์™€ ์‹ค์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๊ฐ„์—๋Š” ํ‰๊ฐ€ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ์— ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๋ฅผ ๋ณด์ด์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์—, UX ์ „๋ฌธ๊ฐ€์™€ ์‹ค์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ทธ๋ฃน์—์„œ ์–ป์€ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ ์ „์ฒด๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ตฌ์กฐ ๋ฐฉ์ •์‹ ๋ชจ๋ธ ๋ถ„์„์„ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ 5์žฅ๊ณผ ์œ ์‚ฌํ•œ ์ˆ˜์ค€์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์–ป์—ˆ๊ณ , ์ถ”ํ›„ ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ชจ๋ธ์„ social AI personal assistant ์ œํ’ˆ์— ์ผ๋ฐ˜ํ™”ํ•˜์—ฌ ํ™œ์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ํŒ๋‹จํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์€ social AI personal assistant ๊ด€๋ จ ์ œํ’ˆ ๋ฐ ์„œ๋น„์Šค์˜ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•  ๋•Œ ํ™œ์šฉ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ ๋ฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€ ํ•ญ๋ชฉ ๊ฐ„์˜ ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๋„์ถœํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด๋ฅผ ๊ฒ€์ฆํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ social AI personal assistant ์ œํ’ˆ ๋ฐ ์„œ๋น„์Šค๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ ์‚ฌ๋ก€์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ์ถ”ํ›„ ์ œํ’ˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ ์ œํ’ˆ์˜ ์ปจ์…‰์„ ๋ช…ํ™•ํžˆ ํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ํ‰๊ฐ€๋ฅผ ์‹ค์‹œํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๋Š” ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ง„์ด ํšจ์œจ์ ์œผ๋กœ ํ™œ์šฉํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๊ธฐ๋Œ€๋œ๋‹ค. ์ถ”ํ›„ ์ด ๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ๊ฒ€์ฆ์„ ์œ„ํ•ด, social AI personal assistants์˜ ์™„์ œํ’ˆ๊ณผ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ์ดˆ๊ธฐ ๋‹จ๊ณ„์˜ video type stimulus๋ฅผ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜๋Š” ์ถ”๊ฐ€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง„๋‹ค๋ฉด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ์˜๋ฏธ๋ฅผ ๋ณด๋‹ค ๋ช…ํ™•ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์ œ์‹œํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์ƒ๊ฐ๋œ๋‹ค.Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background and motivation 1 1.1 Research objectives 5 1.2 Dissertation outline 7 Chapter 2 Literature review 9 2.1 Social AI personal assistant 9 2.2 User centered design process 13 2.3 Technology acceptance models 16 2.4 Evaluation measures for social AI personal assistant 22 2.5 Existing evaluation methodologies for social AI personal assistant 27 Chapter 3 Collection of existing evaluation measures for social AI personal assistants 40 3.1 Background 40 3.2 Methodology 43 3.3 Result 51 3.4 Discussion 60 Chapter 4 Development of an evaluation model for social AI personal assistants 63 4.1 Background 63 4.2 Methodology 66 4.2.1 Developing evaluation measures for social AI personal assistants 68 4.2.2 Conducting user evaluation for social robots 74 4.3 Result 77 4.3.1 Descriptive statistics 77 4.3.2 Hypothesis development and testing 80 4.3.3 Comparison with existing technology acceptance models 88 4.4 Discussion 93 Chapter 5 Verification of an evaluation model with voice assistant services 95 5.1 Background 95 5.2 Methodology 98 5.2.1 Design of evaluation questionnaires for voice assistant services 99 5.2.2 Validation of relationship among evaluation factors 103 5.3 Result 108 5.3.1 Descriptive statistics 108 5.3.2 Hypothesis development and testing 111 5.3.3 Comparison with existing technology acceptance models 118 5.4 Discussion 121 Chapter 6 Conclusion 124 6.1 Summary of this study 124 6.2 Contribution of this study 126 6.3 Limitation and future work 128 Bibliography 129 Appendix A. Evaluation measures for social AI personal assistant collected in Chapter 4 146 Appendix B. Questionnaires for evaluation of social robots 154 Appendix C. Questionnaires for evaluation of voice assistant service 166๋ฐ•

    A Review of Personality in Human Robot Interactions

    Full text link
    Personality has been identified as a vital factor in understanding the quality of human robot interactions. Despite this the research in this area remains fragmented and lacks a coherent framework. This makes it difficult to understand what we know and identify what we do not. As a result our knowledge of personality in human robot interactions has not kept pace with the deployment of robots in organizations or in our broader society. To address this shortcoming, this paper reviews 83 articles and 84 separate studies to assess the current state of human robot personality research. This review: (1) highlights major thematic research areas, (2) identifies gaps in the literature, (3) derives and presents major conclusions from the literature and (4) offers guidance for future research.Comment: 70 pages, 2 figure
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore