Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion

  • Published:
Autonomous Robots Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents the results of video-based Human Robot Interaction (HRI) trials which investigated people’s perceptions of different robot appearances and associated attention-seeking features and behaviors displayed by robots with different appearance and behaviors. The HRI trials studied the participants’ preferences for various features of robot appearance and behavior, as well as their personality attributions towards the robots compared to their own personalities. Overall, participants tended to prefer robots with more human-like appearance and attributes. However, systematic individual differences in the dynamic appearance ratings are not consistent with a universal effect. Introverts and participants with lower emotional stability tended to prefer the mechanical looking appearance to a greater degree than other participants. It is also shown that it is possible to rate individual elements of a particular robot’s behavior and then assess the contribution, or otherwise, of that element to the overall perception of the robot by people. Relating participants’ dynamic appearance ratings of individual robots to independent static appearance ratings provided evidence that could be taken to support a portion of the left hand side of Mori’s theoretically proposed ‘uncanny valley’ diagram. Suggestions for future work are outlined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albright, L., Kenny, D. A., & Malloy, T. E. (1988). Consensus in personality judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55(3), 387–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asquith, P. J. (1997). Why anthropomorphism is not metaphor: crossing concepts and cultures in animal behavior studies. In R. W. Mitchell, N. S. Thompson, & H. L. Miles (Eds.), Anthropomorphism, anecdotes and animals (pp. 22–34). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ball, G., & Breese, J. (2000). Emotion and personality in a conversational agent. In J. Cassell, J. Sullivan, S. Prevost, & E. Churchill (Eds.), Embodied conversational agents. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bethal, C. L., & Murphy, R. R. (2006). Affective expression in appearance-constrained robots. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI/SIGART 2nd conference on human–robot interaction (HRI ’06) (pp. 327–328), Salt Lake City, Utah, US.

  • Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(4), 645–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breazeal, C. L. (2002). Designing sociable robots. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenton, H., Gillies, M., Ballin, D., & Chattin, D. (2005). The uncanny valley: does it exist? In Proceedings of conference of human computer interaction, workshop on human animated character interaction, Napier University, Edinburgh. Available online at: http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/cogsys/workshop/program.html.

  • Bruce, A., Nourbakhsh, I., & Simmons, R. (2002). The role of expressiveness and attention in human–robot interaction. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 2002) (pp. 4138–4143), Washington DC, USA.

  • Burgoon, J.K., & Jones, S. B. (1976). Toward a theory of personal space expectations and their violations. Human Communication Research, 2(2), 131–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dautenhahn, K. (2002). Design spaces and niche spaces of believable social robots. In Proceedings of the 11th annual international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN 02) (pp. 192–197), Berlin, Germany.

  • Dautenhahn, K. (2004) Robots We like to live with?—A developmental perspective on a personalized, life-long robot companion. In Proceedings of the 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN 2004) (pp. 17–22).

  • Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S. N., Kaouri, C., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., & Werry, I. (2005). What is a robot companion—friend, assistant or butler? In Proceedings of IEEE RSJ international conference on intelligent robot systems (IROS’05) (pp. 1488–1493), Edmonton, Canada.

  • Dautenhahn, K., Walters, M. L., Woods, S. N., Koay, K. L., Nehaniv, C. L., Sisbot, E. A., et al. (2006). How may I serve you? A robot companion approaching a seated person in a helping context. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI/SIGART 2nd conference on human robot interaction (HRI ’06) (pp. 172–179), Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.

  • Davis, H. (1997). Animal cognition versus animal thinking: the anthropomorphic. In R. W. Mitchell, N. S. Thompson, & H. L. Miles (Eds.), Anthropomorphism, anecdotes, and animals. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., Dane, F. C., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1993). Social psychology in the ’90s (6th ed.). Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryer, D. C. (1999). Getting personal with computers: how to design personalities for agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13(3), 273–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, B. R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42, 177–190.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ferber, D. (2003). The man who mistook his girlfriend for a robot. Popular Science, September 2003.

  • Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(4-3), 143–166.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., Khan, P. H. & Hagman, J. (2003). Hardware companions?—What online AIBO discussion forums reveal about the human–robotic relationship. In Proceedings of the CHI 2003 conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 273–279), Ft Lauderdale, Florida, USA.

  • Gill, A. J., Oberlander, J., & Austin, E. (2006). Rating e-mail personality at zero acquaintance. Personality and Individual-Differences, 40(3), 497–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, D. L., & Leffler, A. (1983). Theories of nonverbal behavior: a critical review of proxemics research. Sociological Theory, 1, 120–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gockley, R. Matarić, M. (2006). Encouraging physical therapy compliance with a handsoff mobile robot. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI/SIGART 2nd conference on human robot interaction (HRI ’06) (pp. 150–155), Salt Lake City, USA.

  • Goetz, J., Kiesler, S., & Powers, A. (2003). Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human–robot cooperation. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (pp. 55–60), Berkeley, CA, USA.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality Psychology in Europe, 7, 7–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gong, L., & Nass, C. (2007). When a talking-face computer agent is half-human and half-humanoid: human identity and consistency preference. Journal of Human Communication Research, 33(2), 163–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E. T. (1968). Proxemics. Current Anthropology, 9(2-3), 83–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, D. (2006). Exploring the aesthetic range for humanoid robots. In Proceedings of cognitive science (CogSci 2006) workshop on android science (pp. 16–20), Vancouver, BC, Canada.

  • Hanson, D., Olney, A., Pereira, I. A. & Zielke, M. (2005). Upending the uncanny valley. In Proceedings of the American association for artificial intelligence (AAII) conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

  • Hinds, P. J., Roberts, T. L., & Jones, H. (2004). Whose job is it anyway? A study of human–robot interaction in a collaborative task. Human–Computer Interaction, 19, 151–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishiguro, H. (2007). Scientific issues concerning androids. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 26, 101–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanda, T., Hirano, T., & Eaton, D. (2004). Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: a field trial. Human–Computer Interaction, 19, 61–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanda, T., Kamasima, M., Imai, M., Ono, T., Sakamoto, D., Ishiguro, H., & Anzai, Y. (2007). A humanoid robot that pretends to listen to route guidance from a human. Autonomous Robots, 22(1), 87–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan, Z. (1998). Attitudes towards intelligent service robots (Technical report). IPLab, NADA, Royal Institute of Technology. TRITA-NA-E98421, IPLab-154.

  • Kiesler, S., & Goetz, J. (2000). Machine trait scales for evaluating mechanistic mental models of robots and computer-based machines. White paper, www.peopleandrobots.org/hri/images/Machine_scales.pdf. Site last accessed January 2007.

  • Koay, K. L., Syrdal, D. S., Walters, M. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2007, in press). Living with robots: investigating the habituation effect in participants’ preferences during a longitudinal human–robot interaction study. In IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN07) (pp. 564–569), Jeju Island, Korea.

  • Lambert, D. (2004). Body language. New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Kiesler, S. (2005). Human mental models of humanoid robots. In Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA 05) (pp. 2767–2772), Barcelona, Spain.

  • Li, S., Wrede, B., & Sagerer, G. (2006). A dialog system for comparative user studies on robot verbal behavior. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN06) (pp. 129–134).

  • Luczak, H., Roetting, M., & Schmidt, L. (2003). Let’s talk: anthropomorphization as means to cope with stress of interacting with technical devices. Ergonomics, 46(13/14), 1361–1374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDorman, K. F. (2005). Androids as an experimental apparatus: why is there an uncanny valley and can we exploit it? In Proceedings of the CogSci 2005 workshop: toward social mechanisms of android science (pp. 106–118), Stresa, Italy (2003).

  • MacDorman, K., & Ishiguro, H. (2006). The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research. Interaction Studies, 7(3), 297–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minato, T., Shimada, M., Ishiguro, H., & Itakura, S. (2004a). Development of an android robot for studying human–robot interaction, innovations in applied artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on industrial and engineering applications of artificial intelligence and expert systems (IEA/AIE 04) (pp. 424–434).

  • Minato, T., MacDorman, K. F., Shimada, M., Itakura, S., Lee, K., & Ishiguro, H. (2004). Evaluating humanlikeness by comparing responses elicited by an android and a person. In Proceedings of the second international workshop on man-machine symbiotic systems (pp. 373–383), Kyoto, Japan.

  • Mori, M. (1970). Bukimi no tani (The uncanny valley). Energy, 7(4), 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B. J., & Reeves, B. (1995a). Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 43(2), 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C. I., Lombard, M., Henriksen, L., & Steuer, J. (1995b). Anthropocentrism and computers. Behaviour and Information Technology, 14(4), 229–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. (2001). How might humans interact with robots. In Keynote address to the DARPA/NSF workshop on human–robot interaction. San Luis Obispo, CA.

  • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabanovic, S., Michalowski, M. P., & Caporael, L. R., (2007). Making friends: building social robots through interdisciplinary collaboration. In Multidisciplinary collaboration for socially assistive robotics: papers from the AAAI spring symposium (Technical Report SS-07-07) (pp. 71–77).

  • Scopelliti, M., Giuliani, M. V., D’Amico, A. M., & Fornara, F. (2004). If I had a robot at home…. Peoples’ representation of domestic robot. In S. Keates, J. Clarkson, P. Langdon, & P. Robinson (Eds.), Designing a more inclusive world (pp. 257–266).

  • Severinson-Eklundh, K., Green, A., & Huutenrauch, H. (2003). Social and/colaborative aspects of interaction with a service robot. Robotics and Autonomous systems, 42, 223–234.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Stratton, L. O., Tekippe, D. J., & Flick, G. L. (1973). Personal space and self concept. Sociometry, 36, 424–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S. N., Walters, M. L., & Koay, K. L. (2006). Doing the right thing wrong’—personality and tolerance to uncomfortable robot approaches. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN06) (pp. 183–188), University of Hertfordshire, UK.

  • Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Walters, M., & Koay, K. L. (2007a). Looking good? Appearance preferences and robot personality inferences at zero acquaintance. In Multidisciplinary collaboration for socially assistive robotics: papers from the AAAI spring symposium. (Technical Report SS-07-07: 86-92).

  • Syrdal, D. S., Koay, K.-L., Walters, M. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2007b). A personalised robot companion? The role of individual differences on spatial preferences in HRI scenarios. In IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN07) (pp. 26–29), Jeju Island, Korea.

  • Tapus, A., & Matarić, M. J. (2006). User personality matching with hands-off robot for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. In Proceedings of the 10th international symposium on experimental robotics (ISER-06), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

  • te Boekhorst, R., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., Dautenhahn, K., & Nehaniv, C. L. (2005). A study of a single robot interacting with groups of children in a rotation game scenario. In Proceedings of IEEE CIRA 2005 (pp. 35–40), Espoo, Finland.

  • Walters, M. L., Woods, S. N., Koay, K. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2005a). Practical and methodological challenges in designing and conducting human–robot interaction studies. In Proceedings of the AISB’05 symposium on robot companions hard problems and open challenges in human–robot interaction (pp. 110–119), UK.

  • Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K. L., Kaouri, C., te Boekhorst, R., Nehaniv, C. L., Werry, I., & Lee, D. (2005b). Close encounters: spatial distances between people and a robot of mechanistic appearance. In Proceedings of IEEE-RAS international conference on humanoid robots (Humanoids2005) (pp. 450–455), Tsukuba, Japan

  • Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., te Boekhorst, R., Koay, K. L., Kaouri, C., Woods, S. N., Nehaniv, C. L., Lee, D., & Werry, I. (2005c). The influence of subjects’personality traits on personal spatial zones in a human–robot interaction experiment. In Proceedings of IEEE Ro-man 2005, 14th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RoMan05) (pp. 347–352), Nashville, USA.

  • Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., te Boekhorst, R., & Koay, K. L. (2007). Exploring the design space of robot appearance and behavior in an attention-seeking ‘living room’ scenario for a robot companion. In Proceedings of IEEE artificial life (Alife 07) (pp. 341–347), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.

  • Woods, S. N., Dautenhahn, K., & Schulz, J. (2004). The design space of robots: investigating children’s views. In Proceedings of 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN 04) (pp. 47–52), Kurashiki, Okayama Japan.

  • Woods, S. N., Dautenhahn, K., & Kaouri, C. (2005). Is someone watching me? Consideration of social facilitation effects in human–robot interaction experiments. In Proceedings of 2005 IEEE international symposium on computational intelligence in robotics and automation (CIRA 2005) (pp. 53–60), Espoo, Finland.

  • Woods, S. N., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2006a). Comparing human robot interaction scenarios using live and video based methods: towards a novel methodological approach. In Proceedings of the 9th international workshop on advanced motion control (AMC’06) (pp. 750–755), Istanbul, Turkey.

  • Woods, S. N., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., & Dautenhahn, K. (2006b). Methodological issues in HRI: a comparison of live and video-based methods in robot to human approach direction trials. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN06) (pp. 51–58), Hertfordshire, UK.

  • Woods, S. N., Dautenhahn, K., Kaouri, C., te Boekhorst, R., Koay, K. L., & Walters, M. L. (2007). Are robots like people?—Relationships between participant and robot personality traits in human–robot interaction. Interaction Studies, 8(3), 281–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, C., Peng, W., Lee, K. M., & Jin, S. (2004). Can robots have personality? An empirical study of personality manifestation, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 54th annual conference of the international communication association. Online at: www.allacademic.com/meta/p112661_index.html.

  • Zebrowitz, L. A., Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A., & Rhodes, G. (2004). Looking smart and looking good: facial cues to intelligence and their origins. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 238–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Adaptive Systems Research Group, School of Computer Science, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hatfield, Herts, UK

    Michael L. Walters, Dag S. Syrdal, Kerstin Dautenhahn, René te Boekhorst & Kheng Lee Koay

Authors
  1. Michael L. Walters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dag S. Syrdal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kerstin Dautenhahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. René te Boekhorst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kheng Lee Koay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael L. Walters.

Additional information

The HRI study which provides the basis of the research presented in this article has been presented in preliminary form in two conference papers, Walters et al. (2007) and Syrdal et al. (2007b).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Walters, M.L., Syrdal, D.S., Dautenhahn, K. et al. Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Auton Robot 24, 159–178 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-007-9058-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-007-9058-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation