JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

The prevalence of robots will increase in the coming years, making our understanding of how we anthropomorphize and interact with them extremely important. A three factor theory of anthropomorphism called the SEEK model guided the present research. Since anthropomorphism involves a person making attributions of human-likeness toward a non-human object, this model implies that anthropomorphism can be influenced either by factors related to the person or the object.

Objective:

We explored factors influencing the anthropomorphism of robots, specifically the robot’s appearance (humanoid vs. non-humanoid) and agency (autonomous vs. non-autonomous). We expected a more human-like robot would be anthropomorphised to a greater extent than one less human-like. Also, we expected that inducing an agency belief to the effect a robot was making its own decisions would increase anthropomorphism compared to a non-agency belief that the robot was being remotely controlled by a human. We also sought to identify any role gender might play in anthropomorphising.

Methods:

Participants (N=99) were primed for agency or non-agency and then saw a brief video depicting either a humanoid or non-humanoid robot interacting with a confederate. After viewing the video, they completed four anthropomorphism measures including Perception of Humanoid Robots scale (PENROD), the Epley anthropomorphic adjectives, the Fussel anthropomorphic adjective checklist, and the Anthropomorphic Tendencies Scale (ATS).

Results:

Findings with the PENROD scale indicated subjects did perceive the humanoid robot as being more human-like than the non-humanoid robot, F(1,91)= 5.76, P=.018, which means the appearance manipulation was effective. Results with the Epley adjectives indicated that participants were more willing to attribute human-like traits to the non-humanoid rather than the humanoid robot, FF(1,91)= 5.76, P=.018. The Fussel adjective checklist results showed that subjects were more willing to attribute human-like social qualities to the remote-controlled than the autonomous robot, F(1,91)= 5.30, P=.023. Finally, the ATS scale revealed the only gender effects in this study, with females reporting more endorsement of anthropomorphism for pets (P=.02) and less for showing negative emotions toward anthropomorphised objects (P<.001) if they had witnessed the humanoid rather than the non-humanoid robot.

Conclusions:

Contrary to our expectations, participants were less willing to make human-like attributions toward a robot when its morphology was more human-like, and were more willing to make those attributions when they were told that the robot was being remotely controlled by a person rather than acting on its own. In retrospect, these outcomes may have occurred because the humanoid robot used here had a smaller overall stature than the non-humanoid robot, perhaps making it seem more toy-like, and because subjects made attributions toward the person behind the remote controlled robot rather than toward the robot itself. Clinical Trial: N/A