The Influence of a Robot's Social Abilities on Acceptance by Elderly Users
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the influence of perceived social abilities of a robot on user's attitude towards and acceptance of the robot. An interface robot with simulated conversational capabilities was used in a Wizard of Oz experiment with two conditions: a more socially communicative (the robot made use of a larger set of social abilities in interaction) and a less socially communicative interface. Participants (n=40) were observed in 5 minute interaction sessions and were asked to answer questions on perceived social abilities and technology acceptance. Results show that participants who were confronted with the more socially communicative version of the robot felt more comfortable and were more expressive in communicating with it. This suggests that the more socially communicative condition would be more likely to be accepted as a conversational partner. However, the findings did not show a significant correlation between perceived social abilities and technology acceptance
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it