Cover not available
Article published In:
Interaction Studies
Vol. 17:2 (2016) ► pp.211–247

Now you feel it, now you don’t

How observing human-robot interactions and human-human interactions can make you feel eerie

| University of Bristol | New York University Abu Dhabi
| New York University Abu Dhabi
| National Center For Scientific Research “Demokritos”

Robots seemingly in possession of an experiential mind, as well as humans allegedly incapable thereof, have been reported to elicit feelings of eeriness in their perceivers. The current work re-examined this claim, asking participants to rate both robots and humans in various social situations regarding their mind capacities (e.g., emotional capability, intelligence), non-mind qualities (e.g., animacy, usefulness), and overall appeal (e.g., eeriness, likeability). It was found that feelings of eeriness towards both targets formed a distinct emotional response that was separable from simple dislike. Yet, unexpectedly, eeriness towards both targets intensified, the less they were seen as possessing a typical human mind. For robots, however, this association was less consistent. Moreover, eeriness towards robots, but not towards humans, was most strongly predicted by a lack of perceived usefulness. These results indicate that mind attributions affect people’s attitudes towards each other more strongly than their attitudes towards humanoid robots.

Keywords: impression formation, person perception, robot companion, social robotics, Uncanny Valley
Article outline
  • 1.Study 1
    • 1.2Method
      • 1.2.1Participants
      • 1.2.2Procedure
      • 1.2.3Data screening and preprocessing
    • 1.3Results
    • 1.4Discussion
  • 2.Study 2
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Procedure
    • 2.3Results
    • 2.4Discussion
  • 3.General discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 21 December 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.17.2.03qua
References
Amirabdollahian, F., Dautenhahn, K., Dixon, C., Eder, K., Fisher, M., Koay, K. L., Magid, E., Pipe, T., Salem, M., Saunders, J., & Webster, M.
(2013) Can you trust your robotic assistant? Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 82391, 571–573.Google Scholar
Barrett, J. L., & Johnson, A. H.
(2003) The role of control in attributing intentional agency to inanimate objects. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 31, 208–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartneck, C.
(2013) Robots in the theatre and the media. In: Proceedings of the Design & Semantics of Form & Movement (DeSForM2013), Wuxi, August 2013, Philips, 64–70.Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N.
(2009) My robotic doppelganger: A critical look at the uncanny valley theory. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (pp. 269–276). Toyama, Japan.Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S.
(2009) Measurement instruments for anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11, 71–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beck, A., Stevens, B., Bard, K. A., & Caǹamero, L.
(2012) Emotional body language displayed by artificial agents. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 21, 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breazeal, C., & Scassellati, B.
(1999) How to build robots that make friends and influence people. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 858–863. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Breuer, T., Giorgana Macedo, G. R., Hartanto, R., Hochgeschwender, N., Holz, D., Hegger, F. et al.
(2012) Johnny: An autonomous service robot for domestic environments. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 661, 245–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broadbent, E., Kumar, V., Li, X., Sollers 3rd, J., Stafford, R. Q., MacDonald, B. A., Wegner, D. M.
(2013) Robots with display screens: A robot with a more humanlike face display is perceived to have more mind and a better personality. PLoS One, 81, e72589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Broadbent, E., Stafford, R., & MacDonald, B.
(2009) Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: Review and future directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11, 319–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cangelosi, A.
(2010) Grounding language in action and perception: From cognitive agents to humanoid robots. Physics of Life Reviews, 71, 139–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chammat, M., Foucher, A., Nadel, J., & Dubal, S.
(2010) Reading sadness beyond human faces. Brain Research, 13481, 95–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheetham, M., Suter, P., & Jäncke, L.
(2011) The human likeness dimension of the “uncanny valley hypothesis”: Behavioral and functional MRI findings. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 51, Article 126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, I., Looije, R., & Neerincx, M. A.
(2014) Child’s perception of robot’s emotions: Effects of platform, context, and experience. International Journal of Social Robotics, 61, 507–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cross, E. S., Liepelt, R., de Hamilton, A. F. de C., Parkinson, J., Ramsey, R., Stadler, W., & Prinz, W.
(2012) Robotic movement preferentially engages the action observation network. Human Brain Mapping, 331, 2238–2254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dautenhahn, K.
(2007) Socially intelligent robots: Dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London Series B, 3621, 679–704. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Human-Robot Interaction. In M. Soegaard, R. F. Dam (Eds.). The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd ed). Aarhus, Denmark: The Interaction Design Foundation.Google Scholar
Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Kaouri, C., Walters, M., Koay, K. L., & Werry, I.
(2005) What is a robot companion – friend, assistant or butler? Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1192–1197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dominey, P. F., & Warneken, F.
(2011) The basis of shared intentions in human and robot cognition. New Ideas in Psychology, 291, 260–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D.
(2007) Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 121, 121–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T.
(2008a) Creating social connection through inferential reproduction. Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 191, 114–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epley, N., Waytz, A., Akalis, S., & Cacioppo, J. T.
(2008b) When we need a human: Motivational determinants of anthropomorphism. Social Cognition, 261, 143–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T.
(2007) On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 1141, 864–886. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erden, M. S.
(2013) Emotional postures for the humanoid robot Nao. International Journal of Social Robotics, 51, 441–456. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Evans, J.R., & Mathur, A.
(2005) The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 151, 195–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fink, J.
(2012) Anthropomorphism and human likeness in the design of robots and human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Social Robotics, 76211, 199–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flandorfer, P.
(2012) Population aging and socially assistive robots for elderly persons: The importance of sociodemographic factors for user acceptance. International Journal of Population Research, Article 829835. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galinsky, A. D., Gruenfeld, D. H., & Magee, J. C.
(2003) From power to action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 851, 453–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ge, J., & Han, S.
(2008) Distinct neurocognitive strategies for comprehensions of human and artificial intelligence. PLoS One, 31, e2797. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M.
(2007) Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 3151, 619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M.
(2009) Moral typecasting: Divergent perceptions of moral agents and moral patients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 961, 505–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the Uncanny Valley. Cognition, 1251, 125–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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, 55–60.Google Scholar
Hallgren, I.
(2012) Seeing agents when we need to, attributing experience when we feel like it. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 31, 369–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanson, D.
(2006) Exploring the aesthetic range for humanoid robots. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ICCS/CogSci-2006 Long Symposium: Toward Social Mechanisms of Android Science, Vancouver.Google Scholar
Harder, M., Polani, D., & Nehaniv, C. L.
(2010) Two agents acting as one. In H. Fellermann, M. Dorr & M. M. Hanczyc (Eds.). Proceedings of Artificial Life XII (pp. 599–606). Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Heck, R. H., Thomas, S. L., & Tabata, L. N.
(2014) Multilevel and longitudinal modeling with IBM SPSS. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hindriks, K., Neerincx, M. A., & Vink, M.
(2012) The icat as a natural interaction partner. Advances Agent Technology: Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 70681, 212–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ho, C. C., & MacDorman, K. F.
(2010) Revisiting the Uncanny Valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices. Computers in Human Behavior, 261, 1508–1518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ho, C.-C., MacDorman, K., & Pramono, Z. A. D.
(2008) Human emotion and the uncanny valley: A GLM, MDS, and ISOMAP analysis of robot video ratings. In Proceedings of the third ACM/IEEE international conference on human – robot interaction (pp. 169–176). March 11–14, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Jack, A. I., & Robbins, P.
(2012) The phenomenal stance revisited. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 31, 383–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joose, M., Lohse, M., Perez, J. G., & Evers, V.
(2013) What you do is who you are: The role of task context in perceived social robot personality. Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2134–2139.Google Scholar
Ju, W., & Takayama, L.
(2011) Should robots or people do these jobs? A survey of robotics experts and non-experts about which jobs robots should do. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2452–2459. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamide, H., Takubo, T., Ohara, K., Mae, Y., & Arai, T.
(2014) Impressions of humanoids: The development of a measure for evaluating a humanoid. Journal of Social Robotics, 61, 33–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, F.
(2004) Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural differences in the acceptance of robots. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics, 11, 465–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kay, A. C., Moscovitch, D. A., & Laurin, K.
(2010) Randomness, attributions of arousal, and belief in God. Psychological Science, 211, 216–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knobe, J., & Prinz, J.
(2008) Intuitions about consciousness. Experimental studies. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 71, 67–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koay, K. L., Walters, M. L., May, A. Dumitriu, A., Christianson, B., Burke, N., & Dautenhahn, K.
(2013) Exploring robot etiquette: Refining a HRI home companion scenario based on feedback from two artists who lived with robots in the UH robot house. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 82391, 290–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krach, S., Hegel, F., Wrede, B., Sagerer, G., Binkofski, F., & Kircher, T.
(2008) Can machines think? Interaction and perspective taking with robots investigated via fMRI. PLoS One, 31, e2597. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krämer, N. C., von der Pütten, A., & Eimer, S.
(2012) Human-agent and human-robot interaction theory: Similarities to and differences from human-human interaction. In: M. Zacarias, J. V. de Oliveira (Eds.). Human-Computer Interactions (pp. 215–240). Springer Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Kuhlmeier, V. A., Bloom, P., & Wynn, K.
(2004) Do 5-month-old infants see humans as material objects? Cognition, 941, 95–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le, Q. A., Hanoune, S., & Pelachaud, C.
(2011) Design and implementation of an expressive gesture model for a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the IEEE/RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, 134–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, S., Lau, I. Y., & Hong, Y.
(2011) Effects of appearance and functions on likeability and perceived occupational suitability of robots. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 51, 232–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, D., Rau, P., & Li, Y.
(2010) A cross-cultural study: Effect of robot appearance and task. International Journal of Social Robotics, 21, 175–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacDorman, K. F., & Entezari, S. O.
(2015) Individual differences predict sensitivity to the uncanny valley. Interaction Studies, 161, 141–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mavridis, N., Katsaiti, M. S., Naef, S., Falasi, A., Nuaimi, A., Araifi, H. et al.
(2012) Opinions and attitudes toward humanoid robots in the Middle East. AI and Society, 271, 517–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McShane, M.
(2014) Parameterizing mental model ascription across intelligent agents. Interaction Studies, 151, 404–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N., Brooks, R., Shon, A. P., & Rao, R. P. N.
(2010) Social robots are psychological agents for infants: A test of gaze following. Neural Networks, 231, 966–972. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. W., & Hamm, M.
(1997) The interpretation of animal psychology: Anthropomorphism or behavior reading? Behavior, 1341, 173–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mori, M.
(1970) Bukimi no tani [The Uncanny Valley]. Energy, 71, 33–35.Google Scholar
Norenzayan, A., & Hansen, I. G.
(2006) Belief in supernatural agents in the face of death. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 321, 174–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nourbakhsh, I. R.
(2013) Robot futures. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Patel, H., & MacDorman, K. F.
(2015) Sending an avatar to do a human’s job: Compliance with authority persists despite the uncanny valley. Presence, 241, 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piwek, L., McKay, L. S., & Pollick, F. E.
(2014) Empirical evaluation of the Uncanny Valley hypothesis fails to confirm the predicted effect of motion. Cognition, 1301, 271–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prakash, A., & Rogers, W. A.
(2015) Why some humanoid faces are perceived more positively than others: Effects of human-likeness and task. International Journal of Social Robotics, 71, 309–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S.
(2002) Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.1). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Reiser, U., Jacobs, T., Arbeiter, G., Parlitz, C., & Dautenhahn, K.
(2013) Care-O-bot 3 – Vision of a robot butler. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 74071, 97–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robbins, P., & Jack, A. I.
(2006) The phenomenal stance. Philosophical Studies, 1271, 59–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robins, B., Dickerson, P., Stribling, P., & Dautenhahn, K.
(2004) Robot-mediated joint attention in children with autism. Interaction Studies, 51, 161–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal-von der Pütten, A. M., & Krämer, N. C.
(2014) How design characteristics of robots determine evaluation and uncanny valley related responses. Computers in Human Behavior, 361, 422–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sciutti, A., Bisio, A., Nori, F., Metta, G., Fadiga, L., & Sandini, G.
(2013) Robots can be perceived as goal-oriented agents. Interaction Studies, 141, 329–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw-Garlock, G.
(2009) Looking forward to sociable robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11, 249–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Syrdal, D., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K., & Walters, M.
(2009) The negative attitudes towards robots scale and reactions to robot behaviour in a live human-robot interaction study. Proceedings of the AISB Symposium on New Frontiers in Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 109–115). April 8–9. Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Syrdal, D. S., Nomura, T., & Dautenhahn, K.
(2013) The Frankenstein Syndrome Questionnaire – Results from a quantitative cross-cultural survey. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 82391, 270–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sytsma, J., & Machery, E.
(2010) Two conceptions of subjective experience. Philosophical Studies, 1511, 299–327. 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, 1041, 17954–17958. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. C., Trafton, J. G., & McKnight, P.
(2011) The perception of humanness from the movements of synthetic agents. Perception, 401, 695–704. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H.
(2005) Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 281, 675–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vogeley, K., & Bente, G.
(2010) “Artificial humans”: Psychology and neuroscience perspectives on embodiment and nonverbal communication. Neural Networks, 231, 1077–1090. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., Syrdal, D. S., Campbell, A., & Dautenhahn, K.
(2013) Companion robots for elderlyg people: Using theatre to investigate potential users‘ view. International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Ro-Man 2013), IEEE, 691–696. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walters, M. L., Lohse, M., Hanheide, M., Wrede, B., Syrdal, D. S., Koay, K. L., Green, A., Hüttenrauch, H., Dautenhahn, K., Sagerer, G. & Severinson-Eklundh, K.
(2011) Evaluating the robot personality and verbal behavior of domestic robots using video-based studies. Advanced Robotics, 251, 2233–2254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walters, M. L., Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhaun, K., te Boekhorst, R., & Koay, K. L.
(2008) Avoiding the Uncanny Valley: robot appearance, personality, and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Autonomous Robots, 241, 159–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., & Quadflieg, S.
(2015) In our own image? Emotional and neural processing differences when observing human-human versus human-robot interactions. Social Cognitive And Affective Neuroscience, 101, 1515–1524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waytz, A., Gray, K., Epley, N., & Wegner, D. M.
(2010) Causes and consequences of mind perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 141, 383–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waytz, A., Morewedge, C. K., Epley, N., Monteleone, G., Gao, J. H., & Cacioppo, J. T.
(2010) Making sense by making sentient: Effectance motivation increases anthropomorphism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 991, 410–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waytz, A., & Norton, M. I.
(2014) Botsourcing and outsourcing: Robot, British, Chinese, and German workers are for thinking – not feeling – jobs. Emotion, 141, 434–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wojciszke, B., & Abele, A. E.
(2008) The primacy of communion over agency and its reversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 381, 139–1147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Young, J. E., Hawkins, R., Sharlin, E., & Igarashi, T.
(2009) Toward acceptable domestic robots: Applying insights from social psychology. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11, 95–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zlotowski, J. A., Proudfoot, D., Yogeeswaran, K., & Bartneck, C.
(2015) Anthropomorphism: Opportunities and challenges in human-robot interactions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 71, 347–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zlotowski, J. A., Strasser, E., & Bartneck, C.
(2014) Dimensions of anthropomorphism – from humanness to humanlikeness. Proceedings of the ACM / IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 66–73.Google Scholar
Zlotowski, J. A., Sumioka, H., Nishio, S., Glas, D. F., Bartneck, C., & Ishiguro, H.
(2015) Persistence of the uncanny valley: The influence of repeated interactions and a robot’s attitude on its perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 61, Article 883. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Guingrich, Rose E. & Michael S. A. Graziano
2024. Ascribing consciousness to artificial intelligence: human-AI interaction and its carry-over effects on human-human interaction. Frontiers in Psychology 15 DOI logo
Oravec, Jo Ann
2022. Dramaturgical and Ethical Approaches to the Dark Side: An Introduction. In Good Robot, Bad Robot [Social and Cultural Studies of Robots and AI, ], ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
Oravec, Jo Ann
2022. Negative Dimensions of Human-Robot and Human-AI Interactions: Frightening Legacies, Emerging Dysfunctions, and Creepiness. In Good Robot, Bad Robot [Social and Cultural Studies of Robots and AI, ], ► pp. 39 ff. DOI logo
Quadflieg, Susanne & Ian S. Penton-Voak
2017. The Emerging Science of People-Watching: Forming Impressions From Third-Party Encounters. Current Directions in Psychological Science 26:4 ► pp. 383 ff. DOI logo
Quadflieg, Susanne & Kirsten Westmoreland
2019. Making Sense of Other People’s Encounters: Towards an Integrative Model of Relational Impression Formation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 43:2 ► pp. 233 ff. DOI logo
Saunderson, Shane & Goldie Nejat
2019. It Would Make Me Happy if You Used My Guess: Comparing Robot Persuasive Strategies in Social Human–Robot Interaction. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 4:2 ► pp. 1707 ff. DOI logo
Thellman, Sam, Maartje de Graaf & Tom Ziemke
2022. Mental State Attribution to Robots: A Systematic Review of Conceptions, Methods, and Findings. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 11:4 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2024. 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.