Umeå University's logo

This paper highlights and discusses the methodological challenge of combining control and validity in social robotics research. Proactive, future-oriented studies that explore novel technologies and interactions are usually conducted in specially constructed environments and involve completing researcher-defined tasks. While researchers’ control over environments and tasks allows for investigating human-robot interaction phenomena that do not (yet) exist in real-life settings, it may also potentially undermine the validity of the studies. The paper discusses combining control and validity in relation to existing social robotics research and identifies key topics for further methodological developments. The paper argues that detailed and explicit representations of study contexts are crucial to ensure creating consistent study environments. It is also argued that there is a need for analytical tools supporting an understanding of how study participants frame technologies and tasks within particular study contexts.

Social robots and other technologies designed to engage in social interactions with their users increasingly enter our everyday environments. Dealing with conceptual and practical challenges, related to these developments, requires an understanding of these technologies as new types of social actors. However, despite the substantial research effort in HRI and related fields, many basic questions about the meaning of 'social actors' in the case of technological artifacts largely remain open. In this paper, we argue that a potential way to address the questions is avoiding essentialist assumptions about the nature of technological artifacts as social actors. Instead, we propose focusing on contextual framing of artifacts, that is, on how people perceive the artifacts as embedded in meaningful social contexts. In line with this proposition, we call for the development of conceptual and methodological tools that allow researchers to systematically address contextual framing. To illustrate potential directions for this development, we propose tentative versions of two analytical tools: (1) a conceptual model of robot-mediated collaboration, and (2) a set of analytical dimensions specifically focusing on contextual framing of technological agents.

As Artificially Intelligent systems are becoming more and more present in our surroundings, our ways of interacting with them are also changing. From commercial chatbots to home assistants and robot companions, machines are progressively taking up the role of "communicators", provided with their own agency, and able to interact with their human counterparts in new ways. This workshop aimed at gathering experts in fields relevant to the study of AI systems as communicators, including but not limited to Human-Computer Interaction, Artificial Intelligence, Human-Robot and Human-AI Interaction. It was organized in order to discuss new challenges brought by this recent shift, compare methods and perspectives between different fields, and foster long-term collaborations.

As Artificially Intelligent systems are becoming more and more present in our surroundings, our ways of interacting with them are also changing. From commercial chatbots to home assistants and robot companions, machines are progressively taking up the role of “communicators”, provided with their own agency, and able to interact with their human counterparts in new ways. This workshop aimed at gathering experts in fields relevant to the study of AI systems as communicators, including but not limited to Human-Computer Interaction, Artificial Intelligence, Human-Robot and Human-AI Interaction. It was organized in order to discuss new challenges brought by this recent shift, compare methods and perspectives between different fields, and foster long-term collaborations.

The focus of this chapter is on the perspectives on human actions that were adopted in HCI and on how these perspectives influenced HCI research. It is argued that, historically, particular views on human actions played a major role in determining the specific research agendas, methodologies, and outcomes of HCI studies. The discussion in this chapter follows a general trend in HCI research toward increasingly more advanced notions on human actions and a respective series of extensions of the scope of the field from users’ tasks to meaningful actions in real-life contexts. The implications of the broadened scope of HCI for conceptual analyses, empirical studies, and design explorations are discussed. This chapter concludes with reflections on new conceptual developments, addressing transformative and emancipatory effects of technology on human, and even non-human, beings.

Technology-supported stress management is one of the most promising and practically important application areas for intelligent companions, that is, digital assistants evoking empathy and personal attachment. In this paper, we employ the method of Futuristic Autobiographies (FABs) to elicit participants' attitudes and reflections regarding an imaginary digital assistant for stress management, implemented as an intelligent companion. For the purposes of the study, we developed six FABs, highlighting a range of potential issues related to the use of intelligent companions. The participants (N=17) provided their responses to the FABs by completing a survey, and a subset of the participants (N=5) also took part in follow-up online interviews. A thematic analysis of the results revealed six main themes: objectivity of the digital assistant, human-likeness, context-specificity of assistant's behavior, user's control, stress management, and user privacy. The themes, as well as the implications of the results for the design and use of intelligent stress management companions, are discussed.

This paper reports a study of pilots of a robotic telepresence system, exploring the relationship between the pilots' experience of physical presence, overall user experience, and task parameters. The pilots (N=12) performed a set of tasks characterized by different Task Focus (Process vs. Outcome) and Navigation Difficulty (Low vs. High); their experience was assessed by using a set of subjective rating scales. It was found that the experience of being physically present in a remote location positively correlated with self-reported gaming skills, objective indicators of navigation efficiency, as well as feelings of being safe and relaxed. No significant effects of task focus and navigation difficulty were found.

The concept of “social affordances” is commonly used in HCI research. However, the advantages and limitations associated with employing the concept are yet to be fully understood. This paper presents a critical examination of “social affordances”, which includes a discussion of current uses of the concept in HCI and a comparison of “social affordances” with more traditional interpretations of “affordances”. We argue that making full use of “social affordances” as an analytical tool in HCI requires an unpacking of the relationship between perceiving a potential action, supported by the environment, and utilizing the potential and actually carrying out the action. We also argue that in case of “social affordances” it is particularly apparent that the perception of an affordance does not automatically result in a problem-free execution of the respective action, and needs to be integrated with other processes within the overall structure of action regulation. We propose a tentative framework for the analysis of the interplay between perception and action in the enactment of social affordances. Implications of the framework for employing the concept of social affordances in HCI research are discussed.