Cover not available
Article published In:
Envisioning Social Robotics: Current challenges and new interdisciplinary methodologies
Edited by Glenda Hannibal and Astrid Weiss
[Interaction Studies 21:1] 2020
► pp. 85–110

Talking over the robot

A field study of strained collaboration in a dementia-prevention robot class

| Graduate School of Science, Technology, and Policy, KAIST
| Graduate School of Science, Technology, and Policy, KAIST
| Graduate School of Science, Technology, and Policy, KAIST
| Graduate School of Science, Technology, and Policy, KAIST

We analyze the use of Silbot – a “dementia-prevention robot” – in a regional health center in South Korea. From our on-site observation of the Silbot classes, we claim that the efficacy of the robot class relies heavily on the “strained collaboration” between the human instructor and the robot. “Strained collaboration” refers to the ways in which the instructor works with the robot, attempting to compensate for the robot’s functional limitation and social awkwardness. In bringing Silbot into the classroom setting, the instructor employs characteristic verbal tones, bodily movements, and other pedagogical tactics. The instructor even talks over the robot, downplaying its interactional capacity. We conclude that any success of such robot programs requires a deeper understanding of the spatial and human context of robot use, including the role of human operators or mediators and also that this understanding should be reflected in the design, implementation, and evaluation of robot programs.

Keywords: Silbot, dementia-prevention robot, strained collaboration, human-robot interaction, South Korea
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Backgrounds and methods
    • 2.1Research subject
    • 2.2Research method
    • 2.3Research setting
  • 3.A strained human-robot collaboration
    • 3.1Motivating and preparing students for a class with Silbot
    • 3.2Speaking for and talking over the robot
    • 3.3Leading the class with the robot’s assistance
    • 3.4Augmenting the robot’s capacity
  • 4.Discussion: How to make a social robot social
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 24 January 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.18054.jeo
References
Alač, M.
(2009) Moving android: On social robots and body-in-interaction. Social Studies of Science, 39(4), 491–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alač, M., Movellan, J., & Tanaka, F.
(2011) When a robot is social: Spatial arrangements and multimodal semiotic engagement in the practice of social robotics. Social Studies of Science, 41(6), 893–926. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bemelmans, R., Gelderblom, G. J., Jonker, P., & De Witte, L.
(2012) Socially assistive robots in elderly care: A systematic review into effects and effectiveness. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 13(2), 114–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blond, L.
(2019) Studying robots outside the lab: HRI as ethnography. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 10(1), 117–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bruun, M. H., Hanghøj, S., & Hasse, C.
(2015) Studying social robots in practiced places. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 19(2), 143–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Graaf, M. M., Allouch, S. B., & Klamer, T.
(2015) Sharing a life with Harvey: Exploring the acceptance of and relationship-building with a social robot. Computers in Human Behavior, 431, 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fasola, J., & Matarić, M. J.
(2013) A socially assistive robot exercise coach for the elderly. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 2(2), 3–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guevarra, A. R.
(2015) Techno-modeling care: racial branding, dis/embodied labor, and “cybraceros” in South Korea. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 36(3), 139–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasse, C.
(2013) Artefacts that talk: Mediating technologies as multistable signs and tools. Subjectivity, 6(1), 79–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Multistable roboethics. In J. K. B. O. Friis & Robert P. Crease (Ed.), Technoscience and postphenomenology: The manhattan papers (pp. 169–188), Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Iwamura, Y., Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N.
(2011) Do elderly people prefer a conversational humanoid as a shopping assistant partner in supermarkets?. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-robot Interaction, 449–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S. H.
(Eds.) (2015) Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, S., & Draper, H.
(2015) Care, monitoring, and companionship: Views on care robots from older people and their carers. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(5), 673–683. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jøranson, N., Pedersen, I., Rokstad, A. M. M., & Ihlebæk, C.
(2015) Effects on symptoms of agitation and depression in persons with dementia participating in robot-assisted activity: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 16(10), 867–873. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, G. H., Jeon, S., Im, K., Kwon, H., Lee, B. H., Kim, G. Y., ... & Na, D. L.
(2015) Structural brain changes after traditional and robot-assisted multi-domain cognitive training in community-dwelling healthy elderly. PLOS One, 10(4), e0123251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leite, I., Martinho, C., & Paiva, A.
(2013) Social robots for long-term interaction: a survey. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5(2), 291–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levi-Strauss, C.
(1966) The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mindell, D. A.
(2011) Digital apollo: Human and machine in spaceflight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2015) Our robots, ourselves: Robotics and the myths of autonomy. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
National Planning Advisory Committee
(2017) Mun-chae-in-chŏng-pu Kuk-chŏng-un-yŏng 5kae-nyŏn Kye-hoek. [Moon jae-in administration: Five-year plan for the state affairs]. Government of South Korea.Google Scholar
Newhart, V. A., & Olson, J. S.
(2017) My student is a robot: How schools manage telepresence experiences for students. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 342–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orr, J.
(1996) Talking about machines: An ethnography of a modern job. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Oudshoorn, N.
(2008) Diagnosis at a distance: the invisible work of patients and healthcare professionals in cardiac telemonitoring technology. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30(2), 272–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pu, L., Moyle, W., Jones, C., & Todorovic, M.
(2019) The effectiveness of social robots for older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies. The Gerontologist, 59(1), e37–e51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robocare
(2014, May 15). Features and Various Functions of Silbot-3. [Video file]. Retrieved from [URL]
n.d.). SILBOT-3: The ideal intellectual robotic platform for robotic research and application. Retrieved from [URL]
Šabanović, S.
(2010) Robots in society, society in robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(4), 439–450. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Šabanović, S., Bennett, C. C., & Lee, H. R.
(2014) Towards culturally robust robots: A critical social perspective on robotics and culture. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) Workshop on Culture-Aware Robotics.Google Scholar
Shapin, S.
(1989) The invisible technician. American scientist, 77(6), 554–563.Google Scholar
Shin, H.
(2016) Will robots save us? Disaster robotics and sociotechnical imaginary in South Korea. Master’s thesis, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Shin, H. & Jeon, C.
(2018) No-in-kwa lo-pos-ŭn ŏ-ttŏh-ke man-na-nŭn-ka: Sang-ho-chak-yong-ŭi cho-kŏn-kwa mae-kae-cha-ŭi yŏk-hal [When Robots Meet the Elderly: The Contexts of Interaction and the Role of Mediators]. Journal of Science and Technology Studies, 18(2), 135–179. [in Korean]Google Scholar
Sone, Y.
(2016) Japanese robot culture: Performance, imagination, and modernity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
South Korean Presidential Committee on the Fourth Industrial Revolution
(2017) Hyŏk-sin-sŏng-chang-ŭl wi-han sa-lam chung-sim-ŭi 4ch’a san-ŏp-hyŏk-myŏng tae-ŭng-kye-hoek [The people-centered response plan for the 4th industrial revolution to promote innovation growth]. Government of South Korea.Google Scholar
Suchman, L.
(2007) Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.), New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sung, J., Christensen, H. I., & Grinter, R. E.
(2009) Robots in the wild: Understanding long-term use. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, 45–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tamura, T., Yonemitsu, S., Itoh, A., Oikawa, D., Kawakami, A., Higashi, Y., Fujimooto, T., Nakajima, K.
(2004) Is an entertainment robot useful in the care of elderly people with severe dementia?. The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 59(1), M83–M85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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
Vertesi, J.
(2015) Seeing like a rover: How robots, teams, and images craft knowledge of Mars. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 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 logoGoogle Scholar
Westlund, K. J., Gordon, G., Spaulding, S., Lee, J. J., Plummer, L., Martinez, M., Madhurima, D., & Breazeal, C.
(2016) Lessons from teachers on performing HRI studies with young children in schools. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, 383–390.Google Scholar
Willis, M.
(2018) Human centered robotics: designing valuable experiences for social robots. In Proceedings of HRI2018 Workshop (Social Robots in the Wild).
https://doi.org/
Google Scholar
Zafrani, O., & Nimrod, G.
(2018) Towards a holistic approach to studying human–robot interaction in later life. The Gerontologist, 59(1), e26–e36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 3 other publications

Hasse, Cathrine
2022. Humanism, Posthumanism, and New Humanism: How Robots Challenge the Anthropological Object. In The Palgrave Handbook of the Anthropology of Technology, ► pp. 145 ff. DOI logo
Liang, Jie, Guojun Liu & Qingfa Zhou
2021. 2021 China Automation Congress (CAC), ► pp. 6403 ff. DOI logo
Maibaum, Arne, Andreas Bischof, Jannis Hergesell & Benjamin Lipp
2021. A critique of robotics in health care. AI & SOCIETY DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.