skip to main content
10.1145/3434074.3447177acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper
Open Access

Remote You, Haru and Me: Exploring Social Interaction in Telepresence Gaming With a Robotic Agent

Published:08 March 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Novel forms of two-player telegame interaction might extend and enhance social connection between physically separated persons. We examine the potential of a Rock-Paper-Scissors game conveyed via an embodied telepresence agent. We compare a game interaction with an autonomous robot and a game interaction with a teleoperated version of the same robot. Both systems are equipped with a perception module that processes and recognizes the hand movement of the human players colocated with the robot. In the classic interaction, the robot acts as the opponent player. In the telegame setting, the robot represents and mirrors the actions of the remote human player as the opponent. We integrate the systems on the tabletop robot platform Haru and evaluate user impressions with respect to game experience and robot sociality. Results show that the telegame is perceived more positively, indicating its potential for physically distant, but socially enhanced interaction in the future.

References

  1. Ehsan Ahmadi, Ali Ghorbandaei Pour, Alireza Siamy, Alireza Taheri, and Ali Meghdari. 2019. Playing Rock-Paper-Scissors with RASA: A Case Study on Intention Prediction in Human-Robot Interactive Games. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 347--357.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Heike Brock, Javier Ponce Chulani, Luis Merino, Deborah Szapiro, and Randy Gomez. 2020. Developing a Lightweight Rock-Paper-Scissors Framework for Human-Robot Collaborative Gaming. IEEE Access, Vol. 8 (2020), 202958--202968. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3033550Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Colleen M. Carpinella, Alisa B. Wyman, Michael A. Perez, and Steven J. Stroessner. 2017. The Robotic Social Attributes Scale (RoSAS): Development and Validation. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Vienna, Austria) (HRI '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 254--262. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020208Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Filipa Correia, Patricia Alves-Oliveira, Tiago Ribeiro, Francisco S Melo, and Ana Paiva. 2017. A social robot as a card game player. In Thirteenth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Alma Leora Culén, Jorun Børsting, and William Odom. 2019. Mediating Relatedness for Adolescents with ME: Reducing Isolation through Minimal Interactions with a Robot Avatar. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 359--371.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Nisha Devasia, Safinah Ali, and Cynthia Breazeal. 2020. Escape! Bot: Child-Robot Interaction to Promote Creative Expression During Gameplay. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. 219--223.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Randy Gomez, Keisuke Nakamura, Deborah Szapiro, and Luis Merino. 2020. A Holistic Approach in Designing Tabletop Robot's Expressivity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Randy Gomez, Deborah Szapiro, Kerl Galindo, and Keisuke Nakamura. 2018. Haru: Hardware design of an experimental tabletop robot assistant. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. 233--240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Goren Gordon, Samuel Spaulding, Jacqueline Kory Westlund, Jin Joo Lee, Luke Plummer, Marayna Martinez, Madhurima Das, and Cynthia Breazeal. 2016. Affective personalization of a social robot tutor for children's second language skills. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 3951--3957.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Joris B Janssen, Chrissy C van der Wal, Mark A Neerincx, and Rosemarijn Looije. 2011. Motivating children to learn arithmetic with an adaptive robot game. In International conference on social robotics. Springer, 153--162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Kwangmin Jeong, Jihyun Sung, Hae-Sung Lee, Aram Kim, Hyemi Kim, Chanmi Park, Yuin Jeong, Jeehang Lee, and Jinwoo Kim. 2018. Fribo: A Social Networking Robot for Increasing Social Connectedness through Sharing Daily Home Activities from Living Noise Data. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 114--122.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Swapna Joshi, Sawyer Collins, Waki Kamino, Randy Gomez, and Selma Sabanovi?. 2020. Social Robots for Socio-Physical Distancing. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 440--452.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Domen Novak, Aniket Nagle, Urs Keller, and Robert Riener. 2014. Increasing motivation in robot-aided arm rehabilitation with competitive and cooperative gameplay. Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, Vol. 11, 1 (2014), 64.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Giada Pietrabissa and Susan G. Simpson. 2020. Psychological Consequences of Social Isolation During COVID-19 Outbreak. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11 (2020), 2201. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02201Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jari Pirhonen, Elisa Tiilikainen, Satu Pekkarinen, Marjut Lemivaara, and Helina Melkas. 2020. Can robots tackle late-life loneliness? Scanning of future opportunities and challenges in assisted living facilities. Futures, Vol. 124 (2020), 102640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Karolien Poels, Yvonne AW de Kort, and Wijnand A IJsselsteijn. 2007. D3.3: Game Experience Questionnaire: development of a self-report measure to assess the psychological impact of digital games. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Natasha Randall, Casey C Bennett, Selma vS abanoviC, Shinichi Nagata, Lori Eldridge, Sawyer Collins, and Jennifer A Piatt. 2019. More than just friends: in-home use and design recommendations for sensing socially assistive robots (SARs) by older adults with depression. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, Vol. 10, 1 (2019), 237--255.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Hayley Robinson, Bruce MacDonald, Ngaire Kerse, and Elizabeth Broadbent. 2013. The psychosocial effects of a companion robot: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, Vol. 14, 9 (2013), 661--667.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Brian Scassellati, Laura Boccanfuso, Chien-Ming Huang, Marilena Mademtzi, Meiying Qin, Nicole Salomons, Pamela Ventola, and Frederick Shic. 2018. Improving social skills in children with ASD using a long-term, in-home social robot. Science Robotics, Vol. 3, 21 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Elaine Short, Justin Hart, Michelle Vu, and Brian Scassellati. 2010. No fair!! an interaction with a cheating robot. In 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE, 219--226.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Kim Usher, Navjot Bhullar, and Debra Jackson. 2020. Life in the pandemic: Social isolation and mental health. Journal of Clinical Nursing (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Marynel Vázquez, Alexander May, Aaron Steinfeld, and Wei-Hsuan Chen. 2011. A deceptive robot referee in a multiplayer gaming environment. In 2011 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS). IEEE, 204--211.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Remote You, Haru and Me: Exploring Social Interaction in Telepresence Gaming With a Robotic Agent

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              HRI '21 Companion: Companion of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
              March 2021
              756 pages
              ISBN:9781450382908
              DOI:10.1145/3434074
              • General Chairs:
              • Cindy Bethel,
              • Ana Paiva,
              • Program Chairs:
              • Elizabeth Broadbent,
              • David Feil-Seifer,
              • Daniel Szafir

              Copyright © 2021 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 8 March 2021

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • short-paper

              Acceptance Rates

              Overall Acceptance Rate192of519submissions,37%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader