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. 7–23

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

No evidence for enhanced likeability and social motivation towards robots after synchrony experience

 | University of Glasgow
 | University of Glasgow
Published online: 24 January 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.19004.hen
Abstract
A wealth of social psychology studies suggests that moving in synchrony with another person can positively influence their likeability and prosocial behavior towards them. Recently, human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers have started to develop real-time, adaptive synchronous movement algorithms for social robots. However, little is known how socially beneficial synchronous movements with a robot actually are. We predicted that moving in synchrony with a robot would improve its likeability and participants’ social motivation towards the robot, as measured by the number of questions asked during a free interaction period. Using a between-subjects design, we implemented the synchrony manipulation via a drawing task. Contrary to predictions, we found no evidence that participants who moved in synchrony with the robot rated it as more likeable or asked it more questions. By including validated behavioral and neural measures, future studies can generate a better and more objective estimation of synchrony’s effects on rapport with social robots.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Methods
    • Data statement
    • Participants
    • Robotic platform
    • Dependent measures
    • Experimental procedure
    • Data analysis
  • Results
    • Original group split
    • Perceived groups
  • Discussion
    • The Pepper robot as an experimental confederate: Lessons learned
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (32)
References
Bartneck, C., Kuli, D., & Croft, E. (2009). Measurement Instruments for the Anthropomorphism, Animacy, Likeability, Perceived Intelligence, and Perceived Safety of Robots, 71–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berniere, F., Reznick, S., & Rosenthal, R. (1988). Synchrony, Pseudosynchrony and Dissynchrony Measuring the Entrainment Process in Mother Infant Interactions. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Broadbent, E. (2017). Interactions With Robots: The Truths We Reveal About Ourselves. Annu. Rev. Psychol, 68(9), 1–926. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chevallier, C., Kohls, G., Troiani, V., Brodkin, E. S., & Schultz, R. T. (2012). The social motivation theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(4), 231–238. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cross, L., Wilson, A. D., & Golonka, S. (2016). How moving together brings us together: When coordinated rhythmic movement affects cooperation. Frontiers in Psychology, 71(DEC), 1–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Darling, K. (2015). Who’s Jonny.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duffy, B. R. (2000). The social robot paradox. PhD Thesis, (November), 2881.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duffy, B. R., & Joue, G. (2005). The Paradox of Social Robotics : A Discussion. AAAI Fall 2005 Symposium on Machine Ethics, Hyatt Regency.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duffy, B. R., Rooney, C. F. B., Hare, G. M. P. O., & Donoghue, R. P. S. O. (1999). What is a Social Robot ? Computer, 1–3.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eriksson, J., Matarić, M. J., & Winstein, C. J. (2005). Hands-off assistive robotics for post-stroke arm rehabilitation. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE 9th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, 2005, 21–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fasola, J., & Matarić, M. J. (2012). Using socially assistive human-robot interaction to motivate physical exercise for older adults. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(8), 2512–2526. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feil-Seifer, D., & Matarić, M. J. (2011). Socially assistive robotics. Robotics & Automation Magazine, IEEE, 18(1), 24–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hove, M. J., & Risen, J. L. (2009). It’s All in the Timing: Interpersonal Synchrony Increases Affiliation. Social Cognition, 27(6), 949–960. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Irfan, B., Kennedy, J., Senft, E., & Belpaeme, T. (2018). Social psychology and Human-Robot Interaction : an Uneasy Marriage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kasparov, G. (2017). Deep thinking: where machine intelligence ends and human creativity begins. PublicAffairs.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kokal, I., Engel, A., Kirschner, S., & Keysers, C. (2011). Synchronized drumming enhances activity in the caudate and facilitates prosocial commitment-if the rhythm comes easily. PLoS One, 6(11), e27272. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehmann, H., Saez-Pons, J., Syrdal, D. S., & Dautenhahn, K. (2015). In good company? Perception of movement synchrony of a non-anthropomorphic robot. PLoS ONE, 10(5), 1–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenz, T., Weiss, A., & Hirche, S. (2016). Synchrony and Reciprocity: Key Mechanisms for Social Companion Robots in Therapy and Care. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(1), 125–143. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mogan, R., Fischer, R., & Bulbulia, J. A. (2017). To be in synchrony or not? A meta-analysis of synchrony’s effects on behavior, perception, cognition and affect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 721, 13–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mörtl, A., Lorenz, T., & Hirche, S. (2014). Rhythm patterns interaction – Synchronization behavior for human-robot joint action. PLoS ONE, 9(4). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller, B. C. N., Brass, M., Kühn, S., Tsai, C. C., Nieuwboer, W., Dijksterhuis, A., & van Baaren, R. B. (2011). When Pinocchio acts like a human, a wooden hand becomes embodied. Action co-representation for non-biological agents. Neuropsychologia, 49(5), 1373–1377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nomura, T., Kanda, T., & Suzuki, T. (2006). Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human–robot interaction. Ai & Society, 20(2), 138–150. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prescott, T. J., Epton, T., Evers, V., Mckee, K., Webb, T., Benyon, D., … Dario, P. (2012). Robot Companions For Citizens: Roadmapping The Potential For Future Robots In Empowering Older People. Proceedings of the Conference on Bridging Research in Ageing and ICT Development (BRAID), (May). Retrieved from [URL]
Rennung, M., & Göritz, A. S. (2016). Prosocial consequences of interpersonal synchrony: A Meta-Analysis. Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 224(3), 168–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riek, L. D. (2014). The social co-robotics problem space: Six key challenges. Robotics Challenges and Vision (RCV2013).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robins, B., Dautenhahn, K., Boekhorst, R., & Billard, A. (2005). Robotic Assistants in Therapy and Education of Children with Autism: Can a Small Humanoid Robot Help Encourage Social Interaction Skills? Universal Access in the Information Society, 4(2), 105–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sandini, G., Mohan, V., Sciutti, A., & Morasso, P. (2018). Social Cognition for Human-Robot Symbiosis-Challenges and Building Blocks. Frontiers in neurorobotics, 121, 34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shen, Q., Dautenhahn, K., Saunders, J., & Kose, H. (2015). Can real-time, adaptive human–robot motor coordination improve humans’ overall perception of a robot?. IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development, 7(1), 52–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K. L., & Walters, M. L. (2009). The negative attitudes towards robots scale and reactions to robot behaviour in a live human-robot interaction study. Adaptive and Emergent Behaviour and Complex Systems.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wheatley, T., Kang, O., Parkinson, C., & Looser, C. E. (2012). From Mind Perception to Mental Connection Synchrony as a Mechanism for Social Understanding. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(8), 589–606. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiese, E., Metta, G., & Wykowska, A. (2017). Robots as intentional agents: Using neuroscientific methods to make robots appear more social. Frontiers in Psychology, 81(OCT), 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiese, E., Wykowska, A., Zwickel, J., & Müller, H. J. (2012). I See What You Mean: How Attentional Selection Is Shaped by Ascribing Intentions to Others. PLoS ONE, 7(9), 1–7. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Moffat, Ryssa, Leonie Roos, Courtney Casale & Emily S. Cross
2024. Dyadic body competence predicts movement synchrony during the mirror game. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 18 DOI logo
Stoeva, Darja, Andreas Kriegler & Margrit Gelautz
2024. Body Movement Mirroring and Synchrony in Human–Robot Interaction. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 13:4 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Riddoch, Katie A. & Emily S. Cross
2023. Investigating the effect of cardio-visual synchrony on prosocial behavior towards a social robot. Open Research Europe 3 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo
Lomas, James Derek, Albert Lin, Suzanne Dikker, Deborah Forster, Maria Luce Lupetti, Gijs Huisman, Julika Habekost, Caiseal Beardow, Pankaj Pandey, Nashra Ahmad, Krishna Miyapuram, Tim Mullen, Patrick Cooper, Willem van der Maden & Emily S. Cross
2022. Resonance as a Design Strategy for AI and Social Robots. Frontiers in Neurorobotics 16 DOI logo
Takahashi, Hideyuki, Tomoyo Morita, Midori Ban, Hiroka Sabu, Nobutsuna Endo & Minoru Asada
2022. Gradual Rhythm Change of a Drumming Robot Enhances the Pseudosense of Leading in Human–Robot Interactions. IEEE Access 10 ► pp. 36813 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 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