LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Sial, Sara Baber
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects:
This research focuses on the non-verbal emotional communication of a non-android robotic arm used for Human Robot Interaction (HRI). It investigates whether products, by moving in a life-like way, can communicate their emotions and intentions to humans or not. The research focuses mainly on the mechanoid robot (IGUS Robolink) whether it is able to communicate its emotions to the user or not. It further inspects about the motion parameters that are important to change the behaviour of mechanoid robot used.\ud In this study, a relationship is developed between the motion of the robot and the perceived emotion. The validity of the perceived emotion by the user is later checked using three different emotional models: Russell’s circumplex model of affect, Tellegen-Watson-Clark model and PAD scale. The motion characteristics such as velocity and acceleration are changed systematically to observe the change in the perception of affect caused by the robotic motion. The perceived affect is then marked by the user on all three emotional behaviour models.\ud The novelty of the research lies in two facts: Firstly the robotic embodiment used does not have any anthropomorphic or zoomorphic features. Secondly the embodiment is programmed to adopt the smooth human motion profile unlike traditional trapezoidal motion used in industrial robots.\ud From the results produced it can be concluded that the selected motion parameters of velocity and acceleration are linked with the changed of perceived emotions. The emotions at low values of motion parameters are perceived as sad and unhappy. As the values for motion parameters are increased the perceived emotion changes from sad to happy and then to excited. Moreover the validity of perceived emotions is proved as the emotion marked by the user is same on all the three scales, also confirming the reliability of all the three emotional scale models. Another major finding of this research is that mechanoid robots are also able to communicate their emotions to the user successfully. These findings for Human-Robot interaction on user’s perception of emotions are important if robots are to co-exist with humans in various environments, such as co-workers in industry or care-workers in domestic settings.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Table6. 1: Response of participants for Russell's model G1 ...................................................... 57 Table6. 2: Response of participants for Russell's model G2 ...................................................... 58 Table6. 3: Response of participants for Russell's model G3 ...................................................... 59 Table6. 4: Response of participants for Tellegen-Watson-Clark model G1 ............................... 60 Table6. 5: Response of participants for Tellegen-Watson-Clark model G2 ............................... 61 Table6. 6: Response of participants for Tellegen-Watson-Clark model G3 ............................... 62 Table6. 7: Response of participants for PAD model G1............................................................. 63 Table6. 8: Response of participants for PAD model G2............................................................. 64 Table6. 9: Response of participants for PAD model G3............................................................. 66
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article