BEHAVE-II: The Revised Set of Measures to Assess Users’ Attitudinal and Behavioral Responses to a Social Robot | International Journal of Social Robotics Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

BEHAVE-II: The Revised Set of Measures to Assess Users’ Attitudinal and Behavioral Responses to a Social Robot

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to inform the design of behaviors for robots that share domestic and public spaces with people, it is important to know what robot behavior is considered as normative. The work reported in this paper stems from the premise that what is perceived as socially normative behavior for people may differ from what is considered socially normative for a robot. This paper details the development of a data collection instrument, BEHAVE-II, for assessing user responses toward a robot’s behavior using both attitudinal and behavioral responses. To test the validity and reliability of the BEHAVE-II instrument, a human-robot interaction experiment was conducted in which a robot or a human invaded the personal space of a participant. We found that participants’ reactions were stronger when their personal space was invaded by a robot compared with a person. This points to the fact that humans are actually highly sensible whether robots’ adhere to social norms which underlines the importance of the BEHAVE-II instrument.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A simplified version of the scheme is reported in [14].

  2. Artificial Intelligence, Arts & Design, Chemical Engineering, Communication, Earth Sciences, Economics & Management, Electrical Engineering, Humanities & Social Sciences, Information Science & Technology, Law or Mechanical Engineering.

References

  1. Argyle M, Dean J (1965) Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry 289–304

  2. Argyle M, Ingham R, Alkema F, McCallin M (2011) The different functions of gaze. Semiotica 7(1):19–32. doi:10.1515/semi.1973.7.1.19

    Google Scholar 

  3. Black M, Yacoob Y (1995) Tracking and recognizing rigid and non-rigid facial motions using local parametric models of image motion. In: Proceedings of 5th international conference on computer vision, 1995. IEEE, New York, pp 374–381

    Google Scholar 

  4. Butler J, Agah A (2001) Psychological effects of behavior patterns of a mobile personal robot. Auton Robots 10(2):185–202

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Cramer H, Evers V, Ramlal S, van Someren M, Rutledge L, Stash N, Aroyo L, Wielinga B (2008) The effects of transparency on trust in and acceptance of a content-based art recommender. User Model User-Adapt Interact 18(5):455–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dautenhahn K (2003) Roles and functions of robots in human society: implications from research in autism therapy. Robotica 21(4):443–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ekman P, Friesen WV, Hager JC (2002) Facial action coding system. A human face

  8. Guerrero L (2005) Observer ratings of nonverbal involvement and immediacy. In: The sourcebook of nonverbal measures: going beyond words, pp 221–235

    Google Scholar 

  9. Guerrero LK, Jones SM, Burgoon JK (2000) Responses to nonverbal intimacy change in romantic dyads: effects of behavioral valence and degree of behavioral change on nonverbal and verbal reactions. Commun Monogr 67(4):325–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hall E (1969) The hidden dimension. Anchor Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hayduk L (1983) Personal space: where we now stand. Psychol Bull 94(2):293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Heerink M, Krose B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the Almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2(4):361–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ho C, MacDorman K (2010) Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: developing and validating an alternative to the godspeed indices. Comput Hum Behav 26(6):1508–1518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Joosse M, Sardar A, Evers V (2011) Behave: a set of measures to assess users’ attitudinal and non-verbal behavioral responses to a robot’s social behaviors. Soc Robot 84–94

  15. Lee KM, Peng W, Jin SA, Yan C (2006) Can robots manifest personality? An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. J Commun 56(4):754–772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. McCroskey J, McCain T (1974) The measurement of interpersonal attraction

  17. McCroskey J et al (1973) Measurement of the credibility of peers and spouses

  18. Mehrabian A (1968) Some referents and measures of nonverbal behavior. Behav Res Methods 1(6):203–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mumm J, Mutlu B (2011) Human-robot proxemics: physical and psychological distancing in human-robot interaction. In: 2011 6th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI). IEEE, New York, pp 331–338

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nakauchi Y, Simmons R (2002) A social robot that stands in line. Auton Robots 12(3):313–324

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Nomura T, Suzuki T, Kanda T, Kato K (2006) Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots. Interact Stud 7(3):437–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Patterson M (1976) An arousal model of interpersonal intimacy. Psychol Rev 83(3):235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Reeves B, Nass C (1992) How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. The media equation

  24. Sardar A, Joosse M, Weiss A, Evers V (2012) Don’t stand so close to me: users’ attitudinal and behavioral responses to personal space invasion by robots. In: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. ACM, New York, pp 229–230

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Syrdal D, Dautenhahn K, Walters M, Koay K (2008) Sharing spaces with robots in a home scenario—anthropomorphic attributions and their effect on proxemic expectations and evaluations in a live HRI trial. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Fall symposium

    Google Scholar 

  26. Takayama L, Pantofaru C (2009) Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2009). IEEE, New York, pp 5495–5502. 2009

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Wang L, Rau P, Evers V, Robinson B, Hinds P (2009) Responsiveness to robots: effects of ingroup orientation & communication style on HRI in China. In: 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI). IEEE, New York, pp 247–248

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Wang L, Rau P, Evers V, Robinson B, Hinds P (2010) When in Rome: the role of culture & context in adherence to robot recommendations. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. IEEE Press, New York, pp 359–366

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Media Interaction, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Michiel Joosse, Manja Lohse & Vanessa Evers

  2. Institute of Informatics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Aziez Sardar

Authors
  1. Michiel Joosse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aziez Sardar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manja Lohse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vanessa Evers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michiel Joosse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Joosse, M., Sardar, A., Lohse, M. et al. BEHAVE-II: The Revised Set of Measures to Assess Users’ Attitudinal and Behavioral Responses to a Social Robot. Int J of Soc Robotics 5, 379–388 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0191-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0191-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation