Abstract
The word robot was popularized by the Czech writer Karel Cˇapek in his science fiction play Rossumovi Univerzální Roboti, which premiered on January 25, 1921. The play involved a factory that manufactured robots that resembled humans in appearance and had cognitive prowess. The robots were happy to work for humans in the beginning but subsequently rebelled when they realized their strengths, leading to the extinction of the human race.
The field of robotics has evolved significantly since the inception of Cˇapek’s play. Today, robots are used in diverse settings, including teaching children social skills and new languages, taking care of the elderly, performing routine industrial tasks, and assisting in search and rescue missions (e.g., Sheridan, 2016). More recently, a lifelike robot named Sophia has been bestowed citizenship by Saudi Arabia, and a Chinese engineer married a robot he created.
Not far into the future, robots will coexist with humans in all aspects of our everyday lives. As we approach this future, it becomes important to understand how humans will behave with their robotic partners.
In this issue, I highlight some of the factors that designers should keep in mind when designing robots.
Appearance: Humans form assumptions about the capabilities of a robot based on its appearance and expect certain features in robots based on the jobs they are intended to perform. For example, humans tend to prefer humanlike robots (i.e., with facial features, legs, feet, hands) when robots are expected to fulfill social roles, such as taking care of the elderly or teaching children, whereas people prefer mechanical-like robots for less social roles (e.g., military, search and rescue). Further, humans also perceive humanlike robots to be more trustworthy than mechanical-like robots (e.g., Phillips, Ullman, de Graaf, & Malle, 2017).
Competence: Human expectations about the competence of robots is influenced by robots’ appearance, voice, language, and personality. For example, a mature-looking robot is considered to be more knowledgeable than a baby-faced robot (e.g., Warta, 2015).
Gender: Humans tend to have gender stereotypes toward robots, expecting male-appearing robots to be more capable of performing stereotypical male tasks, such as technical repairs, and female-appearing robots to be more capable of performing conventional female tasks, such as taking care of a household (e.g., Warta, 2015). In addition, humans tend to give more credibility to a male voice compared with a female voice when receiving evaluations (an important consideration if one is designing a teaching robot).
Adaptability: Humans interact with humanlike robots similarly to how they interact with other humans and get frustrated when the robots fail to recognize inputs, say names incorrectly, or have delayed responses. Humanlike robots should therefore be able to adapt their responses and participate in engaging conversations with humans (Huang, McDonald, & Gillan, 2017).
Elicitation of emotional response: Humans tend to become emotionally attached to their robots; soldiers become reluctant to send their field robots into the battlefield and even hold funerals for their robots when they are destroyed. Various robotic features contribute to the development of positive emotional responses in humans. For example, a study involving tournament robots showed that ease of learning, ease of use, playfulness, providing a learning experience, low rate of malfunction, and evolution of robot capabilities over time contributed to students’ positive emotions toward their robots (Huang & Gillan, 2014).