ACM Digital Library home
ACM home
Advanced Search
research-article
Open Access

Personality Traits for a Social Mediator Robot Encouraging Elderly Self-Disclosure on Loss Experiences

Publication: ACM Transactions on Human-Robot InteractionMay 2020 Article No.: 17 https://doi.org/10.1145/3377342
  • 1citation
  • 556
    • Downloads
Metrics
Total Citations1
Total Downloads556
Last 12 Months556
Last 6 weeks44
ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction
Volume 9, Issue 3
July 2020
PreviousArticleNextArticle

Abstract

To prevent elderly people from being socially isolated, encouraging their self-disclosure takes an important role. We discuss a use case of social robots in which they are deployed as mediators for humans that intermediate remote communication between elderly people and their family members or friends. The goal of this article is to present a design guideline for such social mediator robots based on results obtained from two studies in which a total of 741 elderly people participated. In study 1, we explored topics in dialogues and found that a social mediator robot could well encourage the self-disclosure of the elderly people, particularly in topics of which they usually feel resistance in talking to others (e.g., loss experiences). Thus, we confirmed the feasibility of the social mediator robot. Study 2 pursued the effective personality traits of the social mediator robot. We re-investigated a well-studied research question of matching robot personality to the user. The results provided more detailed knowledge as to similarity-attraction/repulsion than had been reported previously. Finally, design recommendations were discussed by considering the personality traits of the elderly users as well.

References

  1. Irwin Altman and Dalmas A. Taylor. 1973. Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships. Holt, Rinehart 8 Winston.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Amir Aly and Adriana Tapus. 2013. A model for synthesizing a combined verbal and nonverbal behavior based on personality traits in human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 325--332. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2013.6483606Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Yair Amichai-Hamburger, Galit Wainapel, and Shaul Fox. 2002. “On the Internet no one knows I’m an introvert”: Extroversion, neuroticism, and Internet interaction. CyberPsychology 8 Behavior 5, 2 (2002), 125--128. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102753770507Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Fatemeh Amirazodi and Maryam Amirazodi. 2011. Personality traits and self-esteem. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011), 713--716. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.296Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sean Andrist, Bilge Mutlu, and Adriana Tapus. 2015. Look like me: Matching robot personality via gaze to increase motivation. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 3603--3612. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702592Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Sean Andrist, Xiang Zhi Tan, Michael Gleicher, and Bilge Mutlu. 2014. Conversational gaze aversion for humanlike robots. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, New York, NY, 25--32. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559666Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Roy F. Baumeister and Kathleen D. Vohs (Eds.). 2007. Encyclopedia of Social Psychology. Sage. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412956253Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Elizabeth Broadbent, Chandimal Jayawardena, Ngaire Kerse, Rebecca Q. Stafford, and Bruce A. MacDonald. 2011. Human-robot interaction research to improve quality of life in elder care—An approach and issues. In Proceedings of the Workshops at the 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/WS/AAAIW11/paper/view/3875/4279.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Franziska Burger, Joost Broekens, and Mark A. Neerincx. 2017. Fostering relatedness between children and virtual agents through reciprocal self-disclosure. In BNAIC 2016: Artificial Intelligence. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 765. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 137--154. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67468-1_10Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 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. ACM, New York, NY, 254--262. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020208Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Nikolas Coupland, Justine Coupland, Howard Giles, and Karen Henwood. 1988. Accommodating the elderly: Invoking and extending a theory. Language in Society 17, 1 (1988), 1--41. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500012574Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ronen Cuperman and William Ickes. 2009. Big five predictors of behavior and perceptions in initial dyadic interactions: Personality similarity helps extraverts and introverts, but hurts “disagreeables.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, 4 (2009), 667--684. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015741Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Erik H. Erikson and Joan M. Erikson. 1998. The Life Cycle Completed (Extended Version). W. W. Norton 8 Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Erik H. Erikson, Joan M. Erikson, and Helen Q. Kivnick. 1986. Vital Involvement in Old Age: The Experience of Old Age in Our Time. W. W. Norton 8 Company.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Hans J. Eysenck. 1956. The questionnaire measurement of neuroticism and extraversion. Revista di Psicologia 50 (1956), 113--140.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hans J. Eysenck and Sybil B. G. Eysenck. 1975. Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Junior and Adult). Hodder 8 Stoughton.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Julia Fink. 2012. Anthropomorphism and human likeness in the design of robots and human-robot interaction. In Social Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7621. Springer, 199--208. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34103-8_20Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. David C. Funder and Carl D. Sneed. 1993. Behavioral manifestations of personality: An ecological approach to judgmental accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 64, 3 (1993), 479--490. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.479Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Adrian Furnham. 1990. Language and personality. In Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, H. Giles and W. P. Robinson (Eds.). John Wiley 8 Sons, 73--95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Jonathan Gratch, Ning Wang, Jillian Gerten, Edward Fast, and Robin Duffy. 2007. Creating rapport with virtual agents. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4722. Springer, 125--138. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74997-4_12Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Barbara K. Haight. 1988. The therapeutic role of a structured life review process in homebound elderly subjects. Journal of Gerontology 43, 2 (1988), 40--44. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/43.2.P40Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Marcel Heerink, Ben Kröse, Vanessa Evers, and Bob Wielinga. 2010. Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: The Almere model. International Journal of Social Robotics 2 (2010), 361--375. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Atsushi Hiyama, Akihiro Kosugi, Kentarou Fukuda, Masatomo Kobayashi, and Michitaka Hirose. 2017. Facilitating remote communication between senior communities with telepresence robots. In Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population: Applications, Services and Contexts. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10298. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 501--515. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58536-9_40Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. James S. House. 1981. Work Stress and Social Support. Addison-Wesley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Oliver P. John and Sanjay Srivastava. 1999. The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In Handbook of Personality, Second Edition: Theory and Research, L. A. Pervin and O. P. John (Eds.). Guilford, 102--138.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Adam N. Joinson. 2001. Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology 31, 2 (2001), 177--192. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.36Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Sidney M. Jourard. 1971. The Transparent Self. Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Michael H. Kernis. 2003. Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Inquiry 14, 1 (2003), 1--26. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1401_01Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Toru Kobayashi, Kazushige Katsuragi, Taishi Miyazaki, and Kenichi Arai. 2017. Social media intermediation robot for elderly people using external cloud-based services. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Conference on Mobile Cloud Computing, Services, and Engineering. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 31--38. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MobileCloud.2017.18Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Saso Koceski and Natasa Koceska. 2016. Evaluation of an assistive telepresence robot for elderly healthcare. Journal of Medical Systems 40 (2016), Article No. 121. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0481-xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Hirokazu Kumazaki, Zachary Warren, Amy Swanson, Yuichiro Yoshikawa, Yoshio Matsumoto, Hideyuki Takahashi, Nilanjan Sarkar, et al. 2018. Can robotic systems promote self-disclosure in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder? A pilot study. Frontiers in Psychiatry 9 (2018), Article No. 36. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00036Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Jun Ki Lee and Cynthia Breazeal. 2010. Human social response toward humanoid robot’s head and facial features. In CHI ’10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 4237--4242. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1753846.1754132Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Kwan Min Lee and Clifford Nass. 2003. Designing social presence of social actors in human computer interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 289--296. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642662Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Richard Lippa. 1998. The nonverbal display and judgment of extraversion, masculinity, femininity, and gender diagnosticity: A lens model analysis. Journal of Research in Personality 32, 1 (1998), 80--107. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1997.2189Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Michal Luria, Jessica Hodgins, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2018. The effects of eye design on the perception of social robots. In Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 1032--1037. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525767Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Stephen M. Marson and Rasby M. Powell. 2014. Goffman and the infantilization of elderly persons: A theory in development. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare 41, 4 (2014), 143--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Nikolas Martelaro, Victoria C. Nneji, Wendy Ju, and Pamela Hinds. 2016. Tell me more: Designing HRI to encourage more trust, disclosure, and companionship. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 181--188. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451750Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Alexandros Mileounis, Raymond H. Cuijpers, and Emilia I. Barakova. 2015. Creating robots with personality: The effect of personality on social intelligence. In Artificial Computation in Biology and Medicine. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 9107. Springer, 119--132. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18914-7_13Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Youngme Moon. 2000. Intimate exchanges: Using computers to elicit self-disclosure from consumers. Journal of Consumer Research 26, 4 (2000), 323--339. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1086/209566Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Tsutomu Namikawa, Iori Tani, Takafumi Wakita, Ryuichi Kumagai, Ai Nakane, and Hiroyuki Noguchi. 2012. Development of a short form of the Japanese big-five scale, and a test of its reliability and validity. Japanese Journal of Psychology 83, 2 (2012), 91--99 (in Japanese). DOI:https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.83.91Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Clifford Nass and Kwan Min Lee. 2001. Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 7, 3 (2001), 171--181. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.171Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Clifford Nass, Youngme Moon, B. J. Fogg, Byron Reeves, and D. Christopher Dryer. 1995. Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43, 2 (1995), 223--239. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1995.1042Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Yohei Noguchi and Fumihide Tanaka. 2017. A pilot study investigating self-disclosure by elderly participants in agent-mediated communication. In Proceedings of the 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 29--34. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172276Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Erina Okamura and Fumihide Tanaka. 2016. A pilot study about remote teaching by elderly people to children over a two-way telepresence robot system. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 489--490. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451820Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Atsushi Oshio, Shingo Abe, and Pino Cutrone. 2012. Development, reliability, and validity of the Japanese version of ten item personality inventory (TIPI-J). Japanese Journal of Personality 21, 1 (2012), 40--52 (in Japanese). DOI:https://doi.org/10.2132/personality.21.40Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Laurel D. Riek. 2016. Robotics technology in mental health care. In Artificial Intelligence in Behavioral and Mental Health Care, D. D. Luxton (Ed.). Academic Press, 185--203. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-420248-1.00008-8Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Ben Robins, Kerstin Dautenhahn, and Paul Dickerson. 2009. From isolation to communication: A case study evaluation of robot assisted play for children with autism with a minimally expressive humanoid robot. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 205--211. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ACHI.2009.32Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Morris Rosenberg. 1965. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Ori Rubin. 2015. Contact between parents and adult children: The role of time constraints, commuting and automobility. Journal of Transport Geography 49 (2015), 76--84. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.10.013Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Ryohei Sasama, Tomoharu Yamaguchi, and Keiji Yamada. 2011. An experiment for motivating elderly people with robot guided interaction. In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction: Users Diversity. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6766. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 214--223. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21663-3_23Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Takanori Shibata and Kazuyoshi Wada. 2011. Robot therapy: A new approach for mental healthcare of the elderly—A mini-review. Gerontology 57 (2011), 378--386. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1159/000319015Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Masahiro Shiomi, Aya Nakata, Masayuki Kanbara, and Norihiro Hagita. 2017. A robot that encourages self-disclosure by hug. In Social Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 10652. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 324--333. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_32Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Maki Suganuma. 1997. Self-disclosure and self-esteem in old age. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology 45, 4 (1997), 378--387 (in Japanese). DOI:https://doi.org/10.5926/jjep1953.45.4_378Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Yasir Tahir, Justin Dauwels, Daniel Thalmann, and Nadia Magnenat Thalmann. 2018. A user study of a humanoid robot as a social mediator for two-person conversations. International Journal of Social Robotics. Published online April 25, 2018. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0478-3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Adriana Tapus and Maja J. Matarić. 2008. Socially assistive robots: The link between personality, empathy, physiological signals, and task performance. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Emotion, Personality, and Social Behavior. http://www.aaai.org/Library/Symposia/Spring/2008/ss08-04-021.php.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Sabine Trepte and Michael Scharkow. 2016. Friends and lifesavers: How social capital and social support received in media environments contribute to well-being. In The Routledge Handbook of Media Use and Well-Being: International Perspectives on Theory and Research on Positive Media Effects, L. Reinecke and M. B. Oliver (Eds.). Routledge, 304--316. DOI:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315714752Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Sherry Turkle. 2005. Relational artifacts/children/elders: The complexities of cybercompanions. In Proceedings of the CogSci 2005 Workshop: Toward Social Mechanisms of Android Science. 62--73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Takahisa Uchida, Hideyuki Takahashi, Midori Ban, Jiro Shimaya, Yuichiro Yoshikawa, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2017. A robot counseling system—What kinds of topics do we prefer to disclose to robots? In Proceedings of the 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 207--212. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172303Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Joseph B. Walther. 1996. Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research 23, 1 (1996), 3--43. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Ran Zhao, Alexandros Papangelis, and Justine Cassell. 2014. Towards a dyadic computational model of rapport management for human-virtual agent interaction. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8627. Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 514--527. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09767-1_62Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Personality Traits for a Social Mediator Robot Encouraging Elderly Self-Disclosure on Loss Experiences

        Comments

        Login options

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

        Sign in

        Full Access

        Get this Article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format
        View Issue’s Table of Contents
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!