Cover not available

Article published In: Interaction Studies
Vol. 16:1 (2015) ► pp.1–28

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

The role of social eye-gaze in children’s and adults’ ownership attributions to robotic agents in three cultures

 | Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology |
 | Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University |
 | Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Letters, Kyoto University
 | ATR Intelligent Robotics and Communication Laboratories |
 | Intelligent Robotics Laboratory, Graduate School of Engineering Science, Department of Systems Innovation, Osaka University |
 | School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol |
Published online: 17 August 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.16.1.01kan
Young children often treat robots as social agents after they have witnessed interactions that can be interpreted as social. We studied in three experiments whether four-year-olds from three cultures (China, Japan, UK) and adults from two cultures (Japan, UK) will attribute ownership of objects to a robot that engages in social gaze with a human. Participants watched videos of robot-human interactions, in which objects were possessed or new objects were created. Children and adults applied the same ownership rules to humans and robots – irrespective of whether the robot engaged in social gaze or not. However, there was cultural variation in the types of ownership rules used. In Experiment 3, we removed further social cues, finding that just showing a pair of self-propelled robot-arms elicited ownership attributions. The role of social gaze in social attributions to robots and cross-cultural differences in ownership understanding are discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Eye gaze and social agency
    • 1.2The development of ownership understanding
    • 1.3Cross-cultural difference in attitudes towards robots
    • 1.4Present studies
  • 2.Experiment 1
    • 2.1Methods
      • 2.1.1Participants
      • 2.1.2Video stimuli
      • 2.1.3Procedure
      • 2.1.4Data coding and analyses
    • 2.2Results and discussion
  • 3.Experiment 2
    • 3.1Methods
      • 3.1.1Participants
      • 3.1.2Video stimuli and procedure
      • 3.1.3Data coding and analyses
    • 3.2Results and discussion
  • 4.Experiment 3
    • 4.1Methods
      • 4.1.1Participants
      • 4.1.2Video stimuli
      • 4.1.3Procedure
      • 4.1.4Data coding and analyses
    • 4.2Results and discussion
  • 5.General discussion
    • 5.1The role of eye gaze on ownership attributions to robotic agents
    • 5.2Cross-cultural development of ownership understanding
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (56)
References
Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28(3), 289–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arita, A., Hiraki, K., Kanda, T., & Ishiguro, H. (2005). Can we talk to robots? Ten-month-old infants expected interactive humanoid robots to be talked to by persons. Cognition, 95(3), 49–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, S. (1997). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. MIT press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., & Nomura, T. (2007). The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots. AI & Society, 21(1), 217–230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11, 71–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., & Maechler, M. (2009). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375–32. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beier, J., & Spelke, E. (2012). Infants’ developing understanding of social gaze. Child Development, 83(2), 486–496. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blake, P.R., Ganea, P.A., & Harris, P.L. (2012). Possession is not always the law: With age, preschoolers increasingly use verbal information to identify who owns what. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(2), 259–272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blake, P., & Harris, P. (2009). Children’s understanding of ownership transfers. Cognitive Development, 24(2), 133–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (2011). Early representations of ownership. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2011(132), 39–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, D. (1991). Human universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, M., Nagell, K., Tomasello, M., Butterworth, G., & Moore, C. (1998). Social cognition, joint attention, and communicative competence from 9 to 15 months of age. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 63(4), 1–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csibra, G. (2008). Goal attribution to inanimate agents by 6.5-month-old infants. Cognition, 107(2), 705–717. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2009). Natural pedagogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 148–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunn, J., & Herrera, C. (1997). Conflict resolution with friends, siblings, and mothers: A developmental perspective. Aggressive Behavior, 23(5), 343–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fasig, L.G. (2000). Toddlers’ understanding of ownership: Implications for self-concept development. Social Development, 9(3), 370–382. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedman, O. (2008). First possession: An assumption guiding inferences about who owns what. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(2), 290–295. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friedman, O., & Neary, K.R. (2008). Determining who owns what: Do children infer ownership from first possession? Cognition, 107(3), 829–849. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frischen, A., Bayliss, A., & Tipper, S. (2007). Gaze cueing of attention: Visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 694. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Furby, L. (1978). Possession in humans: An exploratory study of its meaning and motivation. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 6(1), 49–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. (1980). The Origins and Early Development of Possessive Behavior. Political Psychology, 2(1), 30–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gelman, S., Manczak, E., & Noles, N. (2012). The nonobvious basis of ownership: Preschool children trace the history and value of owned objects. Child Development, 83(5), 1732–1747. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, K., & Wegner, D. (2012). Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley. Cognition, 125(1), 125–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hood, B., Willen, J., & Driver, J. (1998). Adult’s eyes trigger shifts of visual attention in human infants. Psychological Science, 9(2), 131–134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Itakura, S., Ishida, H., Kanda, T., Shimada, Y., Ishiguro, H., & Lee, K. (2008). How to build an intentional android: Infants’ imitation of a robot’s goal-directed actions. Infancy, 13(5), 519–532. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, S., Booth, A., & O’Hearn, K. (2001). Inferring the goals of a nonhuman agent. Cognitive Development, 16(1), 637–656. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, S., Slaughter, V., & Carey, S. (1998). Whose gaze will infants follow? The elicitation of gaze‐following in 12‐month‐olds. Developmental Science, 1(2), 233–238. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kahn Jr, P.H., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Freier, N., Severson, R., Gill, B., Ruckert, J.H., & Shen, S. (2012). “Robovie, you’ll have to go into the closet now”: Children’s social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 303–314. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanngiesser, P., Gjersoe, N., & Hood, B.M. (2010). The Effect of Creative Labor on Property-Ownership Transfer by Preschool Children and Adults. Psychological Science, 21(9), 1236–1241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanngiesser, P., & Hood, B. (2013). Not by labor alone: Considerations for value influence use of the labor rule in ownership transfers. Cognitive Science, 38(2), 353–366. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanngiesser, P., & Hood, B.M. (2014). Young children’s understanding of ownership rights for newly made objects. Cognitive Development, 291, 30–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanngiesser, P., Itakura, S., & Hood, B. (2014). The effect of labour on ownership decisions in two cultures: Developmental evidence from Japan and the UK. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 32(3), 320–329. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kalish, C., & Anderson, C. (2011). Ownership as a social status. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2011(132), 65–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kaplan, F. (2004). Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural differences in the acceptance of robots. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics, 1(03), 465–480. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction. Acta Psychol, 261, 22–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, S., & Kalish, C.W. (2009). Children’s ascription of property rights with changes of ownership. Cognitive Development, 24(3), 322–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuhlmeier, V., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2003). Attribution of dispositional states by 12-month-olds. Psychological Science, 14(5), 402–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, K., Eskritt, M., Symons, L., & Muir, D. (1998). Children’s use of triadic eye gaze information for mind reading. Developmental psychology, 34(3), 525. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, D., Rau, P., & Li, Y. (2010). A cross-cultural study: Effect of robot appearance and task. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(2), 175–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacDorman, K., Vasudevan, S., & Ho, C. (2009). Does Japan really have robot mania? Comparing attitudes by implicit and explicit measures. AI & Society, 23(4), 485–510. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macrae, C., Hood, B., Milne, A., Rowe, A., & Mason, M. (2002). Are you looking at me? Eye gaze and person perception. Psychological Science, 13(5), 460–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A., Brooks, R., Shon, A., & Rao, R. (2010). “Social” robots are psychological agents for infants: A test of gaze following. Neural Networks, 23(8), 966–972. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moll, H., & Tomasello, M. (2004). 12‐and 18‐month‐old infants follow gaze to spaces behind barriers. Developmental Science, 7(1), 1–9. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moriguchi, Y., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Itakura, S. (2010). Children perseverate to a human’s actions but not to a robot’s actions. Developmental Science, 131, 62–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Neary, K.R., van de Vondervoort, J., & Friedman, O. (2012). Artifacts and natural kinds: Children’s judgments about whether objects are owned. Developmental Psychology, 481, 149–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noles, N.S., Keil, F.C., Bloom, P., & Gelman, S. (2012). Children’s and adults’ intuitions about who can own things. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 121, 265–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nomura, T., Kanda, T., Suzuki, T., & Kato, K. (2009). Age differences and images of robots: Social survey in Japan. Interaction Studies, 10(3), 374–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nomura, T., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., & Kato, K. (2006). Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots. Interaction Studies, 7(3), 437–454. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nurmsoo, E., Einav, S., & Hood, B. (2012). Best friends: Children use mutual gaze to identify friendships in others. Developmental Science, 15(3), 417–425. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olson, K.R., & Shaw, A. (2011). ‘No fair, copycat!’: What children’s response to plagiarism tells us about their understanding of ideas. Developmental Science, 14(2), 431–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. (2005). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rossano, F., Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Young children’s understanding of violations of property rights. Cognition, 121(2), 219–227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, H., Conant, C., & Vickar, M. (2011). Property rights and the resolution of social conflict. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2011(132), 53–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, A., Li, V., & Olson, K.R. (2012). Children apply principles of physical ownership to ideas. Cognitive Science, 36(8), 1–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1998). One child’s early talk about possession. Typological Studies in Language, 361, 349–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (20)

Cited by 20 other publications

Brake, Calahndra, Kang Lee & Ori Friedman
2026. Not All Authors Are Equal: Moral Judgments of Plagiarism From AI and Human Sources. Open Mind 10 ► pp. 216 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Xiuyuan, Paul Bloom & Julian Jara-Ettinger
2024. People Have Systematically Different Ownership Intuitions in Seemingly Simple Cases. Psychological Science 35:8 ► pp. 858 ff. DOI logo
Espinoza, Ulises J. & H. Clark Barrett
2023. Cultural and contextual variation in first mover norms of ownership: evidence from an Achuar community. Evolution and Human Behavior 44:6 ► pp. 584 ff. DOI logo
Li, Zhanxing & Dong Dong
2023. How you get it matters: Moderating role of transfer method in guiding ownership assignments for modified objects. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Sommer, Kristyn, Virginia Slaughter, Janet Wiles & Mark Nielsen
2023. Revisiting the video deficit in technology-saturated environments: Successful imitation from people, screens, and social robots. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 232 ► pp. 105673 ff. DOI logo
Starmans, Christina & Ori Friedman
2023. Why Children Believe They Are Owned. Open Mind 7 ► pp. 534 ff. DOI logo
Li, Zhanxing, Xiaoli Ni, Liqi Zhu, Jing Li & Lucas Payne Butler
2021. Chinese preschoolers’ ownership reasoning based on first possession heuristic. PLOS ONE 16:12 ► pp. e0260335 ff. DOI logo
Schmiedel, Theresa, Janine Jäger & Vivienne Jia Zhong
2021. Social Robots in Organizational Contexts: The Role of Culture and Future Research Needs. In New Trends in Business Information Systems and Technology [Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 294], ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Schmiedel, Theresa, Janine Jäger & Vivienne Jia Zhong
2023. Soziale Roboter in organisatorischen Kontexten: Die Rolle von Kultur und zukünftiger Forschungsbedarf. In Neue Trends in Wirtschaftsinformatik und eingesetzte Technologien, ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
Di Dio, C., F. Manzi, S. Itakura, T. Kanda, H. Ishiguro, D. Massaro & A. Marchetti
2020. It Does Not Matter Who You Are: Fairness in Pre-schoolers Interacting with Human and Robotic Partners. International Journal of Social Robotics 12:5 ► pp. 1045 ff. DOI logo
Li, Zhanxing, Liqi Zhu, Yingjia Wan, Jing Li & Jing Yu
2020. Effect of transfer type on labor's role in ownership judgments. PsyCh Journal 9:4 ► pp. 553 ff. DOI logo
Manzi, Federico, Giulia Peretti, Cinzia Di Dio, Angelo Cangelosi, Shoji Itakura, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, Davide Massaro & Antonella Marchetti
2020. A Robot Is Not Worth Another: Exploring Children’s Mental State Attribution to Different Humanoid Robots. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Wang, Ying, Yun‐Hee Park, Shoji Itakura, Annette Margaret Elizabeth Henderson, Takayuki Kanda, Naoki Furuhata & Hiroshi Ishiguro
2020. Infants' perceptions of cooperation between a human and robot. Infant and Child Development 29:2 DOI logo
Nancekivell, Shaylene E., Ori Friedman & Susan A. Gelman
2019. Ownership Matters: People Possess a Naïve Theory of Ownership. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23:2 ► pp. 102 ff. DOI logo
Peter, Jochen, Rinaldo Kühne, Alex Barco, Chiara de Jong & Caroline L. van Straten
2019. Asking Today the Crucial Questions of Tomorrow: Social Robots and the Internet of Toys. In The Internet of Toys [Studies in Childhood and Youth, ], ► pp. 25 ff. DOI logo
Friedman, Ori, Madison L. Pesowski & Brandon W. Goulding
2018. Legal Ownership Is Psychological: Evidence from Young Children. In Psychological Ownership and Consumer Behavior, ► pp. 19 ff. DOI logo
Goulding, Brandon W. & Ori Friedman
2018. The development of territory-based inferences of ownership. Cognition 177 ► pp. 142 ff. DOI logo
Li, Zhanxing, Minli Qi, Jing Yu & Liqi Zhu
2018. Who Is the Rightful Owner? Young Children’s Ownership Judgments in Different Transfer Contexts. Frontiers in Psychology 9 DOI logo
Van de Vondervoort, Julia W., Paul Meinz & Ori Friedman
2017. Children’s judgments about ownership rights and body rights: Evidence for a common basis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 155 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Kanngiesser, Patricia, Marco F. H. Schmidt & Federico Rossano
2016. Young Children’s Understanding of Social Norms and Social Institutions. In Women and Children as Victims and Offenders: Background, Prevention, Reintegration, ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 march 2026. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue