Cover not available
Article published In:
Interaction Studies
Vol. 16:1 (2015) ► pp.29–53

Exploring the effect of a user’s personality traits on tactile communication with a robot using Bayesian networks

 | Department of Electrical Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Republic of Korea |
 | SKKU Business School, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea |
Because robots are physically embodied agents, touch is one of the important modalities through which robots communicate with humans. Among the several factors that affect human-robot interaction, this research focuses on the effect of a user’s personality traits on tactile interactions with a robot. Participants interacted freely with a robot and their tactile interaction patterns were analyzed. Several classifiers were used to examine the effect of a participant’s degree of extroversion on tactile communication patterns with the robot and our results showed that a user’s personality traits affected the way in which they interacted with the robot. Specifically, important features of Bayesian networks, such as the Markov blanket and what-if/goal-seeking power were tested and showed the effect of personality on tactile interaction with respect to where and how participants touched the robot. We also found that, by using Bayesian network classifiers, a user’s personality traits can be inferred based on tactile communication patterns.
Keywords: Human-robot interaction, tactile interaction, Personality, General Bayesian network, Markov blanket
Article outline
  • 1.Related work
    • 1.1The effect of personality on social interactions with a robot
    • 1.2Tactile communication with a robot
    • 1.3General Bayesian network and Markov Blanket
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Robot
    • 2.2Participants
    • 2.3Measurements
    • 2.4Procedure
    • 2.5Analysis tools
    • 2.6Dataset
    • 2.7Nodes in classifiers
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Study 1: Comparison of classification performance
    • 3.2Study 2: Causal relationship between personality and touch
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgement
  • References
Published online: 17 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.16.1.02hwa
References (53)
References
Aliferis, C.F., Tsamardinos, I., & Statnikov, A. (2003). HITON: A novel Markov Blanket algorithm for optimal variable selection. AMIA Annual Symposium Proceedings , 21–25.
Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111(2), 256–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Argall, B.D., & Billard, A.G. (2010). A survey of tactile human–robot interactions. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 58(10), 1159–1176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bainbridge, W., Nozawa, S., Ueda, R., Okada, K., & Inaba, M. (2011). Robot sensor data as a means to measure human reactions to an interaction. Paper presented at 11th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids) . DOI logo
Batrinca, L., Lepri, B., & Pianesi, F. (2011). Multimodal recognition of personality during short self-presentations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the joint ACM workshop on Human gesture and behavior understanding , Arizona, USA. DOI logo
Clay, V.S. (1968). The effect of culture on mother-child tactile communication. The Family Coordinator, 17(3), 204–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cristianini, N., & Shawe-Taylor, J. (2000). An introduction to support vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deethardt, J.F., & Hines, D.G. (1983). Tactile communication and personality differences. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8(2), 143–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ewen, R., & Ewen, R.B. (2009). An introduction to theories of personality. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H.J. (2013). The structure of human personality (Psychology Revivals). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gockley, R., Bruce, A., Forlizzi, J., Michalowski, M., Mundell, A., Rosenthal, S., Sellner, B., Simmons, R., Snipes, K., Schultz, A.C., & Jue, W. (2005). Designing robots for long-term social interaction. Paper presented at the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on the Intelligent Robots and Systems . DOI logo
Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., & Swann Jr, W.B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, M., Frank, E., Holmes, G., Pfahringer, B., Reutemann, P., & Witten, I.H. (2009). The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 11(1), 10–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hertenstein, M.J. (2002). Touch: Its communicative functions in infancy. Human Development, 45(2), 70–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hertenstein, M.J., Keltner, D., App, B., Bulleit, B.A., & Jaskolka, A.R. (2006). Touch communicates distinct emotions. Emotion, 6(3), 528–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hertenstein, M.J., Verkamp, J.M., Kerestes, A.M., & Holmes, R.M. (2006). The communicative functions of touch in humans, nonhuman primates, and rats: A review and synthesis of the empirical research. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132(1), 5–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isbister, K., & Nass, C. (2000). Consistency of personality in interactive characters: verbal cues, non-verbal cues, and user characteristics. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53(2), 251–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jin, R., & Agrawal, G. (2003). Efficient decision tree construction on streaming data. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ninth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining , Washington, D.C. DOI logo
John, O.P., Robins, R.W., & Pervin, L.A. (2010). Handbook of personality: Theory and research: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
John, O.P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. Pervin & O. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 102–138): Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Ono, T., Imai, M., & Nakatsu, R. (2002). Development and evaluation of an interactive humanoid robot “Robovie”. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation . DOI logo
Koller, D., & Sahami, M. (1996). Toward optimal feature selection: Stanford Infolab.Google Scholar
Koo, S.-Y., Lim, J.-G., & Kwon, D.-S. (2008). Online touch behavior recognition of hard-cover robot using temporal decision tree classifier. Paper presented at the 17th IEEE International Symposium on the Robot and Human Interactive Communication . DOI logo
Lee, K.C., & Cho, H. (2010). Performance of ensemble classifier for location prediction task: Emphasis on Markov Blanket perspective. International Journal of U- & E-Service, Science & Technology, 3(3), 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, K.M., Peng, W., Jin, S.-A., & Yan, C. (2006). Can robots manifest personality?: An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 754–772. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liao, K., Paulsen, M., Reid, J., Ni, B., & Bonifacio-Maghirang, E. (1993). Corn kernel breakage classification by machine vision using a neural network classifier. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lippa, R., & Dietz, J. (2000). The relation of gender, personality, and intelligence to judges’ accuracy in judging strangers’ personality from brief video segments. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 24(1), 25–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malphurs, J.E., Raag, T., Field, T., Pickens, J., & Pelaez-Nogueras, M. (1996). Touch by intrusive and withdrawn mothers with depressive symptoms. Early Development and Parenting, 5(2), 111–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mastrogiovanni, F., Sgorbissa, A., & Zaccaria, R. (2010). A cognitive model for recognizing human behaviours in smart homes. annals of telecommunications – annales des télécommunications, 65(9–10), 523–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Melson, G.F., Peter, H., Kahn, J., Beck, A.M., Friedman, B., Roberts, T., & Garrett, E. (2005). Robots as dogs?: children’s interactions with the robotic dog AIBO and a live australian shepherd. Paper presented at the CHI Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems , Portland, OR, USA. DOI logo
Mohammadi, G., Vinciarelli, A., & Mortillaro, M. (2010). The voice of personality: Mapping nonverbal vocal behavior into trait attributions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on Social signal processing , Firenze, Italy. DOI logo
Morris, L.W. (1979). Extraversion and introversion: An interactional perspective. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Murray, J.B. (1990). Review of research on the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70(3c), 1187–1202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakagawa, K., Shiomi, M., Shinozawa, K., Matsumura, R., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2011). Effect of robot’s active touch on people’s motivation. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction , Lausanne, Switzerland. DOI logo
Nass, C., & Lee, K.M. (2000). Does computer-generated speech manifest personality? An experimental test of similarity-attraction. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , The Hague, The Netherlands. DOI logo
Pianesi, F., Mana, N., Cappelletti, A., Lepri, B., & Zancanaro, M. (2008). Multimodal recognition of personality traits in social interactions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Multimodal interfaces , Chania, Crete, Greece. DOI logo
Riggio, R.E., & Friedman, H.S. (1986). Impression formation: The role of expressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 421–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salter, T., Boekhorst, R.T., & Dautenhahn, K. (2004). Detecting and analysing children’s play styles with autonomous mobile robots: A case study comparing observational data with sensor readings. Paper presented at the Proc. The 8th Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems .
Salter, T., Dautenhahn, K., & Boekhorst, R. t. (2006). Learning about natural human–robot interaction styles. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 54(2), 127–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salter, T., Michaud, F., Letourneau, D., Lee, D.C., & Werry, I.P. (2007). Using proprioceptive sensors for categorizing human-robot interactions. Paper presented at the 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction . DOI logo
Scalmato, A., Sgorbissa, A., & Zaccaria, R. (2012). Describing and classifying spatial and temporal contexts with OWL DL in Ubiquitous Robotics. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation . DOI logo
Syrdal, D.S., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Walters, M.L., & Koay, K.L. (2006). ‘Doing the right thing wrong’ – Personality and tolerance to uncomfortable robot approaches. Paper presented at the 15th IEEE International Symposium on the Robot and Human Interactive Communication . DOI logo
Takayama, L., & Pantofaru, C. (2009). Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction. Paper presented at the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems . DOI logo
Tanaka, F., Cicourel, A., & Movellan, J.R. (2007). Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(46), 17954–17958. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tapus, A., & Matarić, M.J. (2008). User Personality Matching with a Hands-Off Robot for Post-stroke Rehabilitation Therapy. In O. Khatib, V. Kumar, & D. Rus (Eds.), Experimental Robotics (Vol. 391, pp. 165–175). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tapus, A., Ţăpuş, C., & Matarić, M.J. (2008). User – robot personality matching and assistive robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. Intelligent Service Robotics, 1(2), 169–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trapnell, P.D., & Wiggins, J.S. (1990). Extension of the interpersonal adjective scales to include the big five dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(4), 781–790. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wada, K., Shibata, T., Saito, T., & Tanie, K. (2004). Effects of robot-assisted activity for elderly people and nurses at a day service center. Proceedings of the IEEE , 92(11), 1780–1788. DOI logo
Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K., te Boekhorst, R., Koay, K.L., Kaouri, C., Woods, S., Nehaniv, C., Lee, D., & Werry, I. (2005). The influence of subjects’ personality traits on personal spatial zones in a human-robot interaction experiment. Paper presented at the IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication . DOI logo
Warren, H.C. (1922). Elements of human psychology. Houghton Mifflin Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, J.S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 395–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yaramakala, S., & Margaritis, D. (2005). Speculative Markov blanket discovery for optimal feature selection. Paper presented at the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining . DOI logo
Yohanan, S., & MacLean, K.E. (2012). The role of affective touch in human-robot interaction: Human intent and expectations in touching the haptic creature. International Journal of Social Robotics, 4(2), 163–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar