學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 多模態設計模型塑造人形機器人內中外性格特徵
An Exploration of Multimodal Communication for Developing Extrovert, Ambivert, and Introvert Robot作者 呂玟逸
Lu, Wen-I貢獻者 簡士鎰
Chien, Shih-Yi
呂玟逸
Lu, Wen-I關鍵詞 人機互動
中性個性
多模態溝通
個性特徵
HHRI
Ambivert
Multimodal communication
Personality traits日期 2023 上傳時間 1-Feb-2024 10:56:32 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著人形機器人技術的持續進步，機器人在公共場所的出現越來越普遍，並參與人與人形機器人的互動(HHRI)。不同於傳統資訊系統，人形機器人具有類人的外觀，能夠利用其身體特徵與人類互動。人與人之間的交流通常涉及多模態溝通，包括語言以及非語言等方式。非語言溝通不僅確保了訊息完整傳遞，也增強了情境感知。在HHRI中，了解多模態非語言溝通的潛在影響至關重要，因為它與人與人之間的互動有所不同。此外，機器人的個性在HHRI中也非常重要，它影響著人類的行為和互動方式。除了外部特徵之外，機器人的個性特質(例如外向性、親和性、負責性、開放性和神經質)，通過大五人格量表(BFI)測量也是實現成功人機溝通的關鍵因素。在HHRI研究中，外向和內向特質被經常討論，但許多人同時展現了兩者的特質，即屬於中性人格。因此，為了全面了解HHRI中的機器人個性，必須檢驗不同人格特質(即外向型、內向型和中性)的影響。本研究探討了不同機器人個性特質的多模態溝通影響，具體包括使用語言以及身體動作和手勢行為來表達相關的人格特質。語言線索包含語速而非語言線索包括頭部和身體，手勢動作則運用了運動幅度、速度和頻率等。本研究通過七項實驗，展示了參與者能夠通過語言結合非語言線索成功感知機器人的不同個性。我們也分別研究了在基金投資和保險情境的感知差異。我們發現：1) 具有中性設置的機器人表現出更高的適應性；2) 參與者對基金投資情境的機器人有更明顯的反應；3) 在保險情境，受測者對三種機器人的偏好沒有明顯差異；4) 機器人的性格不影響受測者選擇不同風險等級的商品。這些發現與現實中的機器人產生更強的聯繫，為提升人機溝通和開發更有效的HHRI策略提供了良好的基礎。
With ongoing humanoid robotics advancements, these robots are more present in public spaces, participating in human-humanoid robot interaction (HHRI). Unlike conventional information systems, humanoid robots resemble humans and can physically interact. Humans often use multimodal communication, employing verbal and non-verbal cues, enhancing redundancy and situational awareness. In HHRI, grasping the impact of multimodal non-communication is vital, differing from human-human interaction. Beyond physical features, robot personality significantly influences human behavior and interaction. Traits like extraversion, agreeableness, responsibility, openness, and neuroticism (measured by the Big Five Inventory) play a crucial role in human-robot communication. Among them, extraversion and introversion are commonly studied, but many individuals exhibit qualities of both, falling into the 'ambivert' category. This study explores the effects of robot multimodal communication across the personality spectrum, including extrovert, introvert, and ambivert, utilizing verbal and non-verbal cues (e.g., gestures and movements) to express these traits. This study, through seven experiments, demonstrated that participants could successfully perceive different personalities of robots by multimodal cues. In investment fund and life insurance contexts, the studies indicated that 1) ambivert robots exhibited greater adaptability, 2) participants perceived more distinct personalities in the investment fund context, 3) there was no significant difference in preferences for the three robot types in the insurance context; 4) the robot's personality did not impact participants' product choices with varying risk levels. These findings hold relevance for practical service robots. This research provides fundamental guidelines to improve human-robot communication and develop more effective HHRI strategies.參考文獻 Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 32(4), 665-683. Aly, A., & Tapus, A. (2013). A model for synthesizing a combined verbal and nonverbal behavior based on personality traits in human-robot interaction. 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), Aly, A., & Tapus, A. (2016). Towards an intelligent system for generating an adapted verbal and nonverbal combined behavior in human–robot interaction. Autonomous Robots, 40, 193-209. Andrist, S., Mutlu, B., & Tapus, A. (2015). Look like me: matching robot personality via gaze to increase motivation. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Barco, A., de Jong, C., Peter, J., Kühne, R., & van Straten, C. L. (2020). Robot morphology and children's perception of social robots: An exploratory study. Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Bataev, A. V., Dedyukhina, N., & Nasrutdinov, M. N. (2020). Innovations in the financial sphere: performance evaluation of introducing service robots with artificial intelligence. 2020 9th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management (ICITM), Bloomberg. (2017). Creating Consumer Buzz with Human-Like Robots. Retrieved 11 from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-03-30/creating-consumer-buzz-with-human-like-robots-video Broadbent, E., Stafford, R., & MacDonald, B. (2009). Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: Review and future directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 319-330. Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Bengtsson, B., Cederberg, C., Lundeberg, M., & Allspach, L. (2000). Interactivity in human–computer interaction: A study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(6), 553-574. Celiktutan, O., Sariyanidi, E., & Gunes, H. (2018). Computational analysis of affect, personality, and engagement in human–robot interactions. In Computer Vision for Assistive Healthcare (pp. 283-318). Elsevier. Chen, C.-L. (2021). How Implicit Cues Influence Human-Humanoid Robot Interaction: Combining Personality Traits and Non-verbal Communication for Developing Robot Librarian [Master, National Chengchi University]. https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5gz9mk Chidambaram, V., Chiang, Y.-H., & Mutlu, B. (2012). Designing persuasive robots: how robots might persuade people using vocal and nonverbal cues. Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Chien, S.-Y., Chen, C.-L., & Chan, Y.-C. (2023). The Impacts of Social Humanoid Robot’s Nonverbal Communication on Perceived Personality Traits. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1-13. Cohen, D., & Schmidt, J. P. (1979). Ambiversion: characteristics of midrange responders on the Introversion-Extraversion continuum. Journal of personality assessment, 43(5), 514-516. Commission, F. S. (2017). The financial services industry ensures the suitability of financial products or services for financial consumers through regulations and practices. Retrieved 11 from https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?media=print&pcode=G0380229 Craenen, B., Deshmukh, A., Foster, M. E., & Vinciarelli, A. (2018). Do we really like robots that match our personality? The case of Big-Five traits, Godspeed scores and robotic gestures. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), D’Acunto, F., Prabhala, N., & Rossi, A. G. (2019). The promises and pitfalls of robo-advising. The Review of Financial Studies, 32(5), 1983-2020. Das, B., Mohanty, S., & Shil, N. C. (2008). Mutual fund vs. life insurance: Behavioral analysis of retail investors. International journal of business and management, 3(10), 89-103. Duffy, B. R. (2002). Anthropomorphism and robotics. The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour, 20. Duffy, B. R., & Joue, G. (2004). I, robot being. Intelligent Autonomous Systems Conference (IAS8), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2001). Theories of Personality. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.,. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and autonomous systems, 42(3-4), 143-166. FRS. (2021). Clearly Defined Fund 'Risk-Reward Levels': RR1 to RR5. Retrieved 11 from https://www.fundrich.com.tw/2022OfficialWeb/investingCollege/26749?groupId=IDEA Ghazali, A. S., Ham, J., Barakova, E., & Markopoulos, P. (2018). The influence of social cues in persuasive social robots on psychological reactance and compliance. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 58-65. Grant, A. M. (2013). Rethinking the extraverted sales ideal: The ambivert advantage. Psychological Science, 24(6), 1024-1030. Ham, J., Cuijpers, R. H., & Cabibihan, J.-J. (2015). Combining robotic persuasive strategies: The persuasive power of a storytelling robot that uses gazing and gestures. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7, 479-487. Harris, K., Kimson, A., & Schwedel, A. (2018). Why the automation boom could be followed by a bust. Harvard Business Review, 13. He, H., Wang, W., Zhu, W., & Harris, L. (2015). Service workers’ job performance: The roles of personality traits, organizational identification, and customer orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 49(11/12), 1751-1776. Hudson Jr, S. W., & Ferguson, G. C. (2016). Leadership personalities: Extrovert, introvert or ambivert. International Journal of Management and Economics Invention, 2(9), 999-1002. Insurance, H. L. (2018, 2018). Insurance vs Investment - Did You Get the Right Financial Plan? Retrieved 11 from https://www.hdfclife.com/insurance-knowledge-centre/investment-for-future-planning/difference-between-insurance-and-investment John, O. P. (1991). The big five inventory—versions 4a and 54. (No Title). Joosse, M., Lohse, M., Perez, J. G., & Evers, V. (2013). What you do is who you are: The role of task context in perceived social robot personality. 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Kadylak, T., Bayles, M., & Rogers, W. (2021). Exploring Social and Assistive Domestic Robots for Older Adults: Robot Sociability, Trust, and Acceptance. Innovation in Aging, 5(Suppl 1), 300-300. Kim, H., Kwak, S. S., & Kim, M. (2008). Personality design of sociable robots by control of gesture design factors. RO-MAN 2008-The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lai, W.-M. (2019). Creating Robots with Personality: The Effect of Personality on Users’ Perception and Trust [Master, National Taichung University of Science and Technology]. Lee, H. R., & Riek, L. D. (2018). Reframing assistive robots to promote successful aging. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), 7(1), 1-23. Lee, K. M., Peng, W., Jin, S.-A., & Yan, C. (2006). Can robots manifest personality?: An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. Journal of communication, 56(4), 754-772. Li, R.-H., & Chung, H.-Y. (2020). The Development of A Chinese Shortened Version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Psychological Testing, 67(4), 271-299. Ligthart, M., Fernhout, T., Neerincx, M. A., van Bindsbergen, K. L., Grootenhuis, M. A., & Hindriks, K. V. (2019). A child and a robot getting acquainted-interaction design for eliciting self-disclosure. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on autonomous agents and MultiAgent systems, Liu, Y., Wang, X., & Wang, S. (2022). Research on service robot adoption under different service scenarios. Technology in Society, 68, 101810. Lohse, M., Hanheide, M., Wrede, B., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., Syrdal, D. S., Green, A., Huttenrauch, H., Dautenhahn, K., & Sagerer, G. (2008). Evaluating extrovert and introvert behaviour of a domestic robot—a video study. RO-MAN 2008-The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lombard, M., & Xu, K. (2021). Social responses to media technologies in the 21st century: The media are social actors paradigm. Human-Machine Communication, 2, 29-55. Ludewig, Y., Döring, N., & Exner, N. (2012). Design and evaluation of the personality trait extraversion of a shopping robot. 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Mechinda, P., & Patterson, P. G. (2011). The impact of service climate and service provider personality on employees' customer‐oriented behavior in a high‐contact setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(2), 101-113. Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., Ho, K., & Ritov, I. (1997). Decision affect theory: Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science, 8(6), 423-429. Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 535-556. Mileounis, A., Cuijpers, R. H., & Barakova, E. I. (2015). Creating robots with personality: The effect of personality on social intelligence. Artificial Computation in Biology and Medicine: International Work-Conference on the Interplay Between Natural and Artificial Computation, IWINAC 2015, Elche, Spain, June 1-5, 2015, Proceedings, Part I 6, Morgan, J. P. (2023). Morgan Asset Management Client Risk Profile Assessment Form. https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/asiapacific/tw/zh/supplemental/jf-kyc-nat.pdf Mori, M., MacDorman, K. F., & Kageki, N. (2012). The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robotics & automation magazine, 19(2), 98-100. Mou, Y., Peng, L., & Pang, J. (2023). When Machines Start to Speak: The Evolution of Generative AI Reshaping Human Communication. Muyewen Cultural Co., Ltd. Mou, Y., Shi, C., Shen, T., & Xu, K. (2020). A systematic review of the personality of robot: Mapping its conceptualization, operationalization, contextualization and effects. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 591-605. Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Carney, P. (1999). Are people polite to computers? Responses to computer‐based interviewing systems 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 29(5), 1093-1109. Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. R. (1994). Computers are social actors. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Okita, S. Y., Ng-Thow-Hing, V., & Sarvadevabhatla, R. (2009). Learning together: ASIMO developing an interactive learning partnership with children. RO-MAN 2009-The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Petric, D. (2019). Introvert, extrovert and ambivert. The Knot Theory of Mind, 1, 1-4. Ponaka, S. (2023, 16.10.2023). LIC vs Mutual Fund. Retrieved 10 from https://scripbox.com/mf/lic-vs-mutual-fund/ Powers, A., & Kiesler, S. (2006). The advisor robot: tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, Powers, A., Kiesler, S., Fussell, S., & Torrey, C. (2007). Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, R.O.C., S. I. T. C. A. o. t. (2021). The Republic of China (Taiwan) Securities Investment Trust & Consulting Association's classification standards for fund risk-return levels. Retrieved 11 from https://www.selaw.com.tw/LawArticle.aspx?LawID=G0101140 Robert Jr, L. P., Alahmad, R., Esterwood, C., Kim, S., You, S., & Zhang, Q. (2020). A review of personality in human–robot interactions. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems, 4(2), 107-212. Robert, L. (2018). Personality in the human robot interaction literature: A review and brief critique. Robert, LP (2018). Personality in the Human Robot Interaction Literature: A Review and Brief Critique, Proceedings of the 24th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Aug, Ruhland, K., Zibrek, K., & McDonnell, R. (2015). Perception of personality through eye gaze of realistic and cartoon models. Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Applied Perception, Saberi, M., DiPaola, S., & Bernardet, U. (2021). Expressing Personality Through Non-verbal Behaviour in Real-Time Interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 660895. Shen, Z., Elibol, A., & Chong, N. Y. (2020). Understanding nonverbal communication cues of human personality traits in human-robot interaction. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 7(6), 1465-1477. Shin, Y. H., Im, J., Jung, S. E., & Severt, K. (2018). The theory of planned behavior and the norm activation model approach to consumer behavior regarding organic menus. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 69, 21-29. Song, S. Y., & Kim, Y.-K. (2022). Factors influencing consumers’ intention to adopt fashion robot advisors: psychological network analysis. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 40(1), 3-18. Spatola, N., Kühnlenz, B., & Cheng, G. (2021). Perception and evaluation in human–robot interaction: The Human–Robot Interaction Evaluation Scale (HRIES)—A multicomponent approach of anthropomorphism. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(7), 1517-1539. Spexard, T. P., Hanheide, M., & Sagerer, G. (2007). Human-oriented interaction with an anthropomorphic robot. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23(5), 852-862. Station, F. I. I. (2023). Finfo Insurance Information Station | Easily Find Good Insurance. https://finfo.tw/ Tapus, A., Ţăpuş, C., & Matarić, M. J. (2008). User—robot personality matching and assistive robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. Intelligent Service Robotics, 1, 169-183. Tay, B., Jung, Y., & Park, T. (2014). When stereotypes meet robots: the double-edge sword of robot gender and personality in human–robot interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 75-84. Van Doorn, J., Mende, M., Noble, S. M., Hulland, J., Ostrom, A. L., Grewal, D., & Petersen, J. A. (2017). Domo arigato Mr. Roboto: Emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines and customers’ service experiences. Journal of service research, 20(1), 43-58. Wang, Y., Tree, J. E. F., Walker, M., & Neff, M. (2016). Assessing the impact of hand motion on virtual character personality. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 13(2), 1-23. Weber, E. U., Blais, A. R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain‐specific risk‐attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of behavioral decision making, 15(4), 263-290. Wen, F.-y., & Hsu, Y.-c. (2010). Computers Are Social Actors--Using the Barnum Effect to Investigate Interaction between Web Users and the Visual Elements of Interfaces. Journal of Information Management, 17(2), 29-56. Whelan, S., Burke, M., Barrett, E., Mannion, A., Kovačič, T., Santorelli, A., Luz Oliveira, B., Gannon, L., Shiel, E., & Casey, D. (2020). The effects of MARIO, a social robot, on the resilience of people with dementia: A multiple case study. Gerontechnology. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
資訊管理學系
110356026資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110356026 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 簡士鎰 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chien, Shih-Yi en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 呂玟逸 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lu, Wen-I en_US dc.creator (作者) 呂玟逸 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lu, Wen-I en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Feb-2024 10:56:32 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Feb-2024 10:56:32 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Feb-2024 10:56:32 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0110356026 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/149468 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 資訊管理學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 110356026 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著人形機器人技術的持續進步，機器人在公共場所的出現越來越普遍，並參與人與人形機器人的互動(HHRI)。不同於傳統資訊系統，人形機器人具有類人的外觀，能夠利用其身體特徵與人類互動。人與人之間的交流通常涉及多模態溝通，包括語言以及非語言等方式。非語言溝通不僅確保了訊息完整傳遞，也增強了情境感知。在HHRI中，了解多模態非語言溝通的潛在影響至關重要，因為它與人與人之間的互動有所不同。此外，機器人的個性在HHRI中也非常重要，它影響著人類的行為和互動方式。除了外部特徵之外，機器人的個性特質(例如外向性、親和性、負責性、開放性和神經質)，通過大五人格量表(BFI)測量也是實現成功人機溝通的關鍵因素。在HHRI研究中，外向和內向特質被經常討論，但許多人同時展現了兩者的特質，即屬於中性人格。因此，為了全面了解HHRI中的機器人個性，必須檢驗不同人格特質(即外向型、內向型和中性)的影響。本研究探討了不同機器人個性特質的多模態溝通影響，具體包括使用語言以及身體動作和手勢行為來表達相關的人格特質。語言線索包含語速而非語言線索包括頭部和身體，手勢動作則運用了運動幅度、速度和頻率等。本研究通過七項實驗，展示了參與者能夠通過語言結合非語言線索成功感知機器人的不同個性。我們也分別研究了在基金投資和保險情境的感知差異。我們發現：1) 具有中性設置的機器人表現出更高的適應性；2) 參與者對基金投資情境的機器人有更明顯的反應；3) 在保險情境，受測者對三種機器人的偏好沒有明顯差異；4) 機器人的性格不影響受測者選擇不同風險等級的商品。這些發現與現實中的機器人產生更強的聯繫，為提升人機溝通和開發更有效的HHRI策略提供了良好的基礎。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) With ongoing humanoid robotics advancements, these robots are more present in public spaces, participating in human-humanoid robot interaction (HHRI). Unlike conventional information systems, humanoid robots resemble humans and can physically interact. Humans often use multimodal communication, employing verbal and non-verbal cues, enhancing redundancy and situational awareness. In HHRI, grasping the impact of multimodal non-communication is vital, differing from human-human interaction. Beyond physical features, robot personality significantly influences human behavior and interaction. Traits like extraversion, agreeableness, responsibility, openness, and neuroticism (measured by the Big Five Inventory) play a crucial role in human-robot communication. Among them, extraversion and introversion are commonly studied, but many individuals exhibit qualities of both, falling into the 'ambivert' category. This study explores the effects of robot multimodal communication across the personality spectrum, including extrovert, introvert, and ambivert, utilizing verbal and non-verbal cues (e.g., gestures and movements) to express these traits. This study, through seven experiments, demonstrated that participants could successfully perceive different personalities of robots by multimodal cues. In investment fund and life insurance contexts, the studies indicated that 1) ambivert robots exhibited greater adaptability, 2) participants perceived more distinct personalities in the investment fund context, 3) there was no significant difference in preferences for the three robot types in the insurance context; 4) the robot's personality did not impact participants' product choices with varying risk levels. These findings hold relevance for practical service robots. This research provides fundamental guidelines to improve human-robot communication and develop more effective HHRI strategies. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents Abstract 2 Table of Contents 3 Tables 5 Figures 6 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 7 Chapter 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 11 2.1 Research on the Personality 11 2.2 Building Personalities on Humanoid Robot 14 2.2.1 Multimodal communication design 14 2.2.2 Review on extrovert and introvert design 16 2.3 Interaction quality 19 2.4 Risk level 21 2.4.1 Risk level in contexts 21 2.4.2 Risk level of products in investment fund context 23 Chapter 3 EMPIRICAL OVERVIEW 25 Chapter 4 STUDY 1: SETTING UP ROBOT INTROVERT, AMBIVERT AND EXTROVERT PERSONALITY 30 4.1 Study 1a: Setting of extrovert and introvert personality 32 4.2 Study 1b: Setting of ambivert personality – order 34 4.3 Study 1c: Setting of ambivert personality -merging proportion 36 4.4 Study 1d: Setting of extrovert, introvert and ambivert personality 39 4.5 Discussion 41 Chapter 5 STUDY 2: PERCEIVED ROBOT PERSONALITY’S IMPACT ON THE CONTEXT OF INSURANCE AND INVESTMENT FUNDS 43 5.1 Method 44 5.1.1 Procedure 44 5.1.2 Stimulus and measures 46 5.1.3 Contexts Design 49 5.1.4 Texts on Tablet Design 51 5.1.5 Interaction design 52 5.2 Result 53 5.2.1 Demographic information 53 5.2.2 Manipulation check on robot personality setting 55 5.2.3 Interaction evaluation 59 5.2.4 Robot preference, purchase intention and service rating 62 5.2.5 Products risk level in fund context 68 5.2.6 Discussion 69 CHAPTER 6 GENERAL DISCUSSION 71 6.1 Theoretical Insights 72 6.2 Managerial implications 73 6.3 Limitations and Future Research 74 Reference 76 Appendix A 81 Appendix B 84 Appendix C 89 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2486144 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110356026 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 人機互動 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 中性個性 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 多模態溝通 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 個性特徵 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) HHRI en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Ambivert en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Multimodal communication en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Personality traits en_US dc.title (題名) 多模態設計模型塑造人形機器人內中外性格特徵 zh_TW dc.title (題名) An Exploration of Multimodal Communication for Developing Extrovert, Ambivert, and Introvert Robot en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 32(4), 665-683. Aly, A., & Tapus, A. (2013). A model for synthesizing a combined verbal and nonverbal behavior based on personality traits in human-robot interaction. 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), Aly, A., & Tapus, A. (2016). Towards an intelligent system for generating an adapted verbal and nonverbal combined behavior in human–robot interaction. Autonomous Robots, 40, 193-209. Andrist, S., Mutlu, B., & Tapus, A. (2015). Look like me: matching robot personality via gaze to increase motivation. Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Barco, A., de Jong, C., Peter, J., Kühne, R., & van Straten, C. L. (2020). Robot morphology and children's perception of social robots: An exploratory study. Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Bataev, A. V., Dedyukhina, N., & Nasrutdinov, M. N. (2020). Innovations in the financial sphere: performance evaluation of introducing service robots with artificial intelligence. 2020 9th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management (ICITM), Bloomberg. (2017). Creating Consumer Buzz with Human-Like Robots. Retrieved 11 from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2017-03-30/creating-consumer-buzz-with-human-like-robots-video Broadbent, E., Stafford, R., & MacDonald, B. (2009). Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: Review and future directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 319-330. Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Bengtsson, B., Cederberg, C., Lundeberg, M., & Allspach, L. (2000). Interactivity in human–computer interaction: A study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(6), 553-574. Celiktutan, O., Sariyanidi, E., & Gunes, H. (2018). Computational analysis of affect, personality, and engagement in human–robot interactions. In Computer Vision for Assistive Healthcare (pp. 283-318). Elsevier. Chen, C.-L. (2021). How Implicit Cues Influence Human-Humanoid Robot Interaction: Combining Personality Traits and Non-verbal Communication for Developing Robot Librarian [Master, National Chengchi University]. https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5gz9mk Chidambaram, V., Chiang, Y.-H., & Mutlu, B. (2012). Designing persuasive robots: how robots might persuade people using vocal and nonverbal cues. Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Chien, S.-Y., Chen, C.-L., & Chan, Y.-C. (2023). The Impacts of Social Humanoid Robot’s Nonverbal Communication on Perceived Personality Traits. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 1-13. Cohen, D., & Schmidt, J. P. (1979). Ambiversion: characteristics of midrange responders on the Introversion-Extraversion continuum. Journal of personality assessment, 43(5), 514-516. Commission, F. S. (2017). The financial services industry ensures the suitability of financial products or services for financial consumers through regulations and practices. Retrieved 11 from https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?media=print&pcode=G0380229 Craenen, B., Deshmukh, A., Foster, M. E., & Vinciarelli, A. (2018). Do we really like robots that match our personality? The case of Big-Five traits, Godspeed scores and robotic gestures. 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), D’Acunto, F., Prabhala, N., & Rossi, A. G. (2019). The promises and pitfalls of robo-advising. The Review of Financial Studies, 32(5), 1983-2020. Das, B., Mohanty, S., & Shil, N. C. (2008). Mutual fund vs. life insurance: Behavioral analysis of retail investors. International journal of business and management, 3(10), 89-103. Duffy, B. R. (2002). Anthropomorphism and robotics. The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour, 20. Duffy, B. R., & Joue, G. (2004). I, robot being. Intelligent Autonomous Systems Conference (IAS8), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2001). Theories of Personality. McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.,. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and autonomous systems, 42(3-4), 143-166. FRS. (2021). Clearly Defined Fund 'Risk-Reward Levels': RR1 to RR5. Retrieved 11 from https://www.fundrich.com.tw/2022OfficialWeb/investingCollege/26749?groupId=IDEA Ghazali, A. S., Ham, J., Barakova, E., & Markopoulos, P. (2018). The influence of social cues in persuasive social robots on psychological reactance and compliance. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 58-65. Grant, A. M. (2013). Rethinking the extraverted sales ideal: The ambivert advantage. Psychological Science, 24(6), 1024-1030. Ham, J., Cuijpers, R. H., & Cabibihan, J.-J. (2015). Combining robotic persuasive strategies: The persuasive power of a storytelling robot that uses gazing and gestures. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7, 479-487. Harris, K., Kimson, A., & Schwedel, A. (2018). Why the automation boom could be followed by a bust. Harvard Business Review, 13. He, H., Wang, W., Zhu, W., & Harris, L. (2015). Service workers’ job performance: The roles of personality traits, organizational identification, and customer orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 49(11/12), 1751-1776. Hudson Jr, S. W., & Ferguson, G. C. (2016). Leadership personalities: Extrovert, introvert or ambivert. International Journal of Management and Economics Invention, 2(9), 999-1002. Insurance, H. L. (2018, 2018). Insurance vs Investment - Did You Get the Right Financial Plan? Retrieved 11 from https://www.hdfclife.com/insurance-knowledge-centre/investment-for-future-planning/difference-between-insurance-and-investment John, O. P. (1991). The big five inventory—versions 4a and 54. (No Title). Joosse, M., Lohse, M., Perez, J. G., & Evers, V. (2013). What you do is who you are: The role of task context in perceived social robot personality. 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Kadylak, T., Bayles, M., & Rogers, W. (2021). Exploring Social and Assistive Domestic Robots for Older Adults: Robot Sociability, Trust, and Acceptance. Innovation in Aging, 5(Suppl 1), 300-300. Kim, H., Kwak, S. S., & Kim, M. (2008). Personality design of sociable robots by control of gesture design factors. RO-MAN 2008-The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lai, W.-M. (2019). Creating Robots with Personality: The Effect of Personality on Users’ Perception and Trust [Master, National Taichung University of Science and Technology]. Lee, H. R., & Riek, L. D. (2018). Reframing assistive robots to promote successful aging. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), 7(1), 1-23. Lee, K. M., Peng, W., Jin, S.-A., & Yan, C. (2006). Can robots manifest personality?: An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. Journal of communication, 56(4), 754-772. Li, R.-H., & Chung, H.-Y. (2020). The Development of A Chinese Shortened Version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI). Psychological Testing, 67(4), 271-299. Ligthart, M., Fernhout, T., Neerincx, M. A., van Bindsbergen, K. L., Grootenhuis, M. A., & Hindriks, K. V. (2019). A child and a robot getting acquainted-interaction design for eliciting self-disclosure. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on autonomous agents and MultiAgent systems, Liu, Y., Wang, X., & Wang, S. (2022). Research on service robot adoption under different service scenarios. Technology in Society, 68, 101810. Lohse, M., Hanheide, M., Wrede, B., Walters, M. L., Koay, K. L., Syrdal, D. S., Green, A., Huttenrauch, H., Dautenhahn, K., & Sagerer, G. (2008). Evaluating extrovert and introvert behaviour of a domestic robot—a video study. RO-MAN 2008-The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Lombard, M., & Xu, K. (2021). Social responses to media technologies in the 21st century: The media are social actors paradigm. Human-Machine Communication, 2, 29-55. Ludewig, Y., Döring, N., & Exner, N. (2012). Design and evaluation of the personality trait extraversion of a shopping robot. 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Mechinda, P., & Patterson, P. G. (2011). The impact of service climate and service provider personality on employees' customer‐oriented behavior in a high‐contact setting. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(2), 101-113. Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., Ho, K., & Ritov, I. (1997). Decision affect theory: Emotional reactions to the outcomes of risky options. Psychological Science, 8(6), 423-429. Mende, M., Scott, M. L., van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research, 56(4), 535-556. Mileounis, A., Cuijpers, R. H., & Barakova, E. I. (2015). Creating robots with personality: The effect of personality on social intelligence. Artificial Computation in Biology and Medicine: International Work-Conference on the Interplay Between Natural and Artificial Computation, IWINAC 2015, Elche, Spain, June 1-5, 2015, Proceedings, Part I 6, Morgan, J. P. (2023). Morgan Asset Management Client Risk Profile Assessment Form. https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/asiapacific/tw/zh/supplemental/jf-kyc-nat.pdf Mori, M., MacDorman, K. F., & Kageki, N. (2012). The uncanny valley [from the field]. IEEE Robotics & automation magazine, 19(2), 98-100. Mou, Y., Peng, L., & Pang, J. (2023). When Machines Start to Speak: The Evolution of Generative AI Reshaping Human Communication. Muyewen Cultural Co., Ltd. Mou, Y., Shi, C., Shen, T., & Xu, K. (2020). A systematic review of the personality of robot: Mapping its conceptualization, operationalization, contextualization and effects. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(6), 591-605. Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Carney, P. (1999). Are people polite to computers? Responses to computer‐based interviewing systems 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 29(5), 1093-1109. Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. R. (1994). Computers are social actors. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Okita, S. Y., Ng-Thow-Hing, V., & Sarvadevabhatla, R. (2009). Learning together: ASIMO developing an interactive learning partnership with children. RO-MAN 2009-The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Petric, D. (2019). Introvert, extrovert and ambivert. The Knot Theory of Mind, 1, 1-4. Ponaka, S. (2023, 16.10.2023). LIC vs Mutual Fund. Retrieved 10 from https://scripbox.com/mf/lic-vs-mutual-fund/ Powers, A., & Kiesler, S. (2006). The advisor robot: tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART conference on Human-robot interaction, Powers, A., Kiesler, S., Fussell, S., & Torrey, C. (2007). Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot interaction, R.O.C., S. I. T. C. A. o. t. (2021). The Republic of China (Taiwan) Securities Investment Trust & Consulting Association's classification standards for fund risk-return levels. Retrieved 11 from https://www.selaw.com.tw/LawArticle.aspx?LawID=G0101140 Robert Jr, L. P., Alahmad, R., Esterwood, C., Kim, S., You, S., & Zhang, Q. (2020). A review of personality in human–robot interactions. Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems, 4(2), 107-212. Robert, L. (2018). Personality in the human robot interaction literature: A review and brief critique. Robert, LP (2018). Personality in the Human Robot Interaction Literature: A Review and Brief Critique, Proceedings of the 24th Americas Conference on Information Systems, Aug, Ruhland, K., Zibrek, K., & McDonnell, R. (2015). Perception of personality through eye gaze of realistic and cartoon models. Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Applied Perception, Saberi, M., DiPaola, S., & Bernardet, U. (2021). Expressing Personality Through Non-verbal Behaviour in Real-Time Interaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 660895. Shen, Z., Elibol, A., & Chong, N. Y. (2020). Understanding nonverbal communication cues of human personality traits in human-robot interaction. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 7(6), 1465-1477. Shin, Y. H., Im, J., Jung, S. E., & Severt, K. (2018). The theory of planned behavior and the norm activation model approach to consumer behavior regarding organic menus. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 69, 21-29. Song, S. Y., & Kim, Y.-K. (2022). Factors influencing consumers’ intention to adopt fashion robot advisors: psychological network analysis. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 40(1), 3-18. Spatola, N., Kühnlenz, B., & Cheng, G. (2021). Perception and evaluation in human–robot interaction: The Human–Robot Interaction Evaluation Scale (HRIES)—A multicomponent approach of anthropomorphism. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(7), 1517-1539. Spexard, T. P., Hanheide, M., & Sagerer, G. (2007). Human-oriented interaction with an anthropomorphic robot. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23(5), 852-862. Station, F. I. I. (2023). Finfo Insurance Information Station | Easily Find Good Insurance. https://finfo.tw/ Tapus, A., Ţăpuş, C., & Matarić, M. J. (2008). User—robot personality matching and assistive robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. Intelligent Service Robotics, 1, 169-183. Tay, B., Jung, Y., & Park, T. (2014). When stereotypes meet robots: the double-edge sword of robot gender and personality in human–robot interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 75-84. Van Doorn, J., Mende, M., Noble, S. M., Hulland, J., Ostrom, A. L., Grewal, D., & Petersen, J. A. (2017). Domo arigato Mr. Roboto: Emergence of automated social presence in organizational frontlines and customers’ service experiences. Journal of service research, 20(1), 43-58. Wang, Y., Tree, J. E. F., Walker, M., & Neff, M. (2016). Assessing the impact of hand motion on virtual character personality. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP), 13(2), 1-23. Weber, E. U., Blais, A. R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain‐specific risk‐attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of behavioral decision making, 15(4), 263-290. Wen, F.-y., & Hsu, Y.-c. (2010). Computers Are Social Actors--Using the Barnum Effect to Investigate Interaction between Web Users and the Visual Elements of Interfaces. Journal of Information Management, 17(2), 29-56. Whelan, S., Burke, M., Barrett, E., Mannion, A., Kovačič, T., Santorelli, A., Luz Oliveira, B., Gannon, L., Shiel, E., & Casey, D. (2020). The effects of MARIO, a social robot, on the resilience of people with dementia: A multiple case study. Gerontechnology. zh_TW
