휴머노이드 로봇의 얼굴 디자인에 대한 인간의 태도에 관한 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

For robots to be more useful and supportive to humans, they must be able to respond and communicate accurately to our needs and demands. It is more important that people should understand what robots are saying as much as robot has to know the meaning of human's action; this is the most important thing that many robot designers are considering.
If so, how can human beings perceive what robots are saying? In face-to-face interaction, humans communicate relying on mostly their facial expressions, speech and gestures. Among them facial expressions are known to be the most powerful means in conveying one's attitude to others.
The present paper is focused on the design of a robot's face that maps out human preferences for the robot's face appearance. The robot’s faces are classified into four groups according to their level of abstractions of appearance. This study conducted a survey with 30 Koreans and 63 Filipinos through questionnaire and short interviews. The questionnaire consists of a series of images that were classified according to the attributes of robot's appearance. To check on the significant difference of human's preferences among groups, one-way ANOVA analysis, Tukey-test and T-test were conducted. The result of the analysis shows significant difference of human's preference for the design of robot faces. For the most part, participants least liked the robots from human-like looking.
This study draws the significant disparity between what human likes and familarity to human-likeness. Therefore, the result provides a useful ground to design the robot faces so that robot developers could not be caught in their own snare of human-likeness appearance of robots

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Jones, B. C., "facial attractiveness is only sin deep" 33 (33): 569-576, 2004

2 Brave, S., "User Responses to Emotion in Embodied Agents" 2003

3 Davids, A., "Urban search and rescue robots: Form tragedy to technology" 2004

4 Thrun, S., "Toward a Framework for Human-Robot Interaction" 19 (19): 2004

5 Ramey, C. H., "The uncanny valley of similarities concerning abortion, baldness, heaps of sand, and humanlike robots" 2005

6 MacDorman, K. F., "The uncanny advantage of using androids in social and cognitive science research" 7 (7): 297-337, 2006

7 Woods, S., "The design space of robots: Investigating children’'s views" 2004

8 Blow, M., "The Art of Designing Robot Faces-Dimensions for human-Robot Interaction" 2006

9 MacDorman, K. F., "Subjective Ratings of Robot Video Clips for Human Likeness, Familiarity, and Eeriness" 2006

10 Hanson, D., "Identity Emulation Facial Expression Robots" 2002

11 Murphy, R.R., Rogers, E., "Human-robot interaction, Final Report for the DARPA/NSF study on Human-Robot Interaction"

12 Lee, S., "Human mental models of humanoid robots, Robotics and Automation, 2005" 2005

13 Hanson, D., "Exploring the Aesthetic Range for Humanoid Robots" 2006

14 Dautenhahn, K., "Design spaces and niche spaces of believable social robots" 2002

15 Ekman, P., "Constants across cultures in the face and emotion" 17 : 124-129, 1971

16 Mehrabian A., "Communication without words" 2 (2): 53-56, 1967

17 Mori, M., "Bukimi no tani [The uncanny valley] (K.F. MacDorman & T. Minato, Trans.)Originally published 1970; Energy, 7(4), 33-35"

18 Langlois, L., "Attractive faces are only average" 1 : 115-121, 1990

19 Ishiguro, H., "Android science: Toward a new cross-disciplinary framework" 2005

20 Ramey, C. H., "An Inventory of Reported Characteristics for Home Computers, Robots, and Human Beings : Applications for Android Science and the Uncanny Valley" 2006

21 DiSalvo, C., "All Robots Are Not Created Equal : The Design and Perception of Humanoid Robot Head" 2002

22 Pransky, J., "AIBO-the No.1 selling service robot" 28 (28): 24-26, 2001

23 Fong,T., "A survey of socially interactive robots" 42 : 2003