his.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 4 of 4
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Billing, Erik
    et al.
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Rosén, Julia
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Lindblom, Jessica
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Expectations of robot technology in welfare2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We report findings from a survey on expectations of robot technology in welfare, within the coming 20 years. 34 assistant nurses answered a questionnaire on which tasks, from their daily work, that they believe robots can perform, already today or in the near future. Additionally, the Negative attitudes toward robots scale (NARS) was used to estimate participants' attitudes towards robots in general. Results reveal high expectations of robots, where at least half of the participants answered Already today or Within 10 years to 9 out of 10 investigated tasks. Participants were also fairly positive towards robots, reporting low scores on NARS. The obtained results can be interpreted as a serious over-estimation of what robots will be able to do in the near future, but also large varieties in participants' interpretation of what robots are. We identify challenges in communicating both excitement towards a technology in rapid development and realistic limitations of this technology.

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
  • 2.
    Rosén, Julia
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Are ethics overlooked in the field of Human-Robot Interaction?2019In: Proceedings of the 15th SweCog Conference / [ed] Linus Holm, Erik Billing, Skövde: University of Skövde , 2019, p. 19-19Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There are, in any scientific research practice, ethical guidelines to adhere to. For example, the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct by the American Psychological Association (2017), WMA Declaration of Helsinki by the World Medical Association (2018), and Ethics for Researchers by the European Commission (2013), all offer principles on how to conduct research ethically. Although the formulations of guidelines vary, the following aspects are usually included: data protection, privacy, informed consent, deception, and debriefing. However, these aspects are rarely explicitly addressed in publications in the field of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). Proper ethical conduct is an integral part of scientific research and ought to be included in this field as well. There might be societal implications if participants in HRI studies are deceived regarding the actual capabilities of social robots. 

    A literature study is planned in order to investigate and analyse how ethical issues are considered in publications from the HRI 2018 conference, e.g., what ratio of publication dealing with human participants mention ethical aspects explicitly. The aim is to contribute to a methodology in HRI where ethical aspects have a significant bearing.

  • 3.
    Rosén, Julia
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Towards Understanding Social Robots2019Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    The emerging research field of human-robot interaction (HRI) has grown increasingly popular as social robots are being introduced to the general public with applications such as elderly care, companionship, or therapy. With researchers with multidisciplinary backgrounds from e.g. psychology, cognitive science, computer science, how HRI is chosen to be framed is still discussed. My research aims to gain a deeper knowledge of how humans interpret and understand social robots. When interacting with social robots, humans tend to prescribe more intelligence than what the robot is actually capable of. Due to this expectation from the humans, one may fill in a gap between what humans prescribe in social robots and what they actually can do. People’s expectations of robots and other agents has been previously addressed in different ways, e.g. in research on anthropomorphism, intentional stance, and autonomy. My aim is to address this in social robots and look at the different levels when this occurs. My first approach involves how humans respond to robots on a low level cognitive function, namely anticipatory gaze. Previous research has shown that humans have anticipatory gaze when observing another human move objects with their hands. This ties into the direct-matching hypothesis: human’s understand another human’s action by mapping it to their own motor representation of that action. Preliminary research has shown that this is also possible if the hand performing the action is a social robot. Although the social robot has no agency, humans tend to fill in this intelligence in the robot and thus eliciting anticipatory gaze. Another more explicit way of deepening the knowledge of this topic, is how human’s describe and react to an interaction with social robots. Because social robots are such a new artefact, most humans are not used to interacting with them and yet they tend to have preconceived notions of what they are capable of. I ask, how are humans actually interacting with robots and how are they influenced by these preconceived notions? Furthermore, what responsibility to we have a researchers towards participants when exposing them to social robots? Are we deceiving participants when we are not transparent with what the robot is actually capable of? There is a need to understand this further in HRI in order to continue with the important research that is being done in this field.

  • 4.
    Rosén, Julia
    et al.
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Richardson, Kathleen
    De Montfort University, Leicester, United Kingdom.
    Lindblom, Jessica
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    Billing, Erik
    University of Skövde, School of Informatics. University of Skövde, The Informatics Research Centre.
    The Robot Illusion: Facts and Fiction2018In: Proceedings of Workshop in Explainable Robotics System (HRI), 2018Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    "To researchers and technicians working with robots on a daily basis, it is most often obvious what is part of the staging and not, and thus it may be easy to forget that illusions like these are not explicit and the that the general public may actually be deceived. Should the disclosure of the illusion be the responsibility of roboticists? Or should the assumption be that human beings, on the basis of their experiences as an audience in film, theatre, music or video gaming, assume the audience is able to enjoy the experience without needing to know everything in advance about how the illusion is created? Therefore, we believe that a discussion of whether or not researchers should be more transparent in what kinds of machines they are presenting is necessary. How can researchers present interactive robots in an engaging way, without misleading the audience?"

    Download full text (pdf)
    fulltext
1 - 4 of 4
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf