Influence of User Personality Traits and Attitudes on Interactions With Social Robots: Systematic Review
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Social robots are robots that can interact and communicate with people in accordance with social norms. They are increasingly implemented in various environments including healthcare, education and the service industry. Individual differences, such as personality traits and attitudes are drivers of human social behaviours and interactions. As robots are increasingly developed as social agents, the drive to develop more socially acceptable, user-centered robots calls for a synthesis of existing findings to improve our understanding how user traits and attitudes influence human-robot interactions (HRI). Understanding the role of individual differences, and their impact on lived experience, is crucial for designing interactions that are better tailored to users. Currently, it is unclear whether or how personality traits and user attitudes affect HRI, which interaction modalities are being investigated and what is the quality of existing evidence. To address these questions, we conducted a systematic search of the literature, yielding 56 articles, from which we extracted relevant findings. As some of the studies included qualitative outcomes, we used a mixed methods meta-aggregation, in which findings were grouped into categories to form more general synthesized findings. We found evidence that user personality traits and attitudes are indeed correlated with social HRI outcomes, including extraversion being associated with preferred distance from the robot, preference for similar robot personality traits, users’ impressions of robots and behavior towards robots. Our analysis also revealed that existing evidence has limitations which prevent us from drawing unambiguous conclusions, such as disparate interaction outcome measures, lack of comparison between different robots and small sample sizes. We provide a comprehensive summary of the existing evidence and propose that these findings can guide the development of research hypotheses to extend knowledge and to provide clarification where the existing literature is ambiguous or contradictory. Findings that warrant future investigation include different preferred robot behaviours based on extroversion and introversion, the impact of user traits on perceived robot anthropomorphism and social presence of the robot.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle