BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//Sabre//Sabre VObject 4.5.8//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/Zurich X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Zurich TZURL:http://tzurl.org/zoneinfo/Europe/Zurich BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:19810329T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:19961027T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:news302@english.philhist.unibas.ch DTSTAMP;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20221124T172617 DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20210426T101500 SUMMARY:What Makes Robots Persuasive? DESCRIPTION:Robots have been shown to be interacted with in social ways\, s ometimes even as if they were humans\, which suggests that they may genera lly be able to persuade others just like people (e.g. Fogg & Nass 1997\; H am et al. 2015\; Fischer 2016). For instance\, in an elderly care facility \, it may be useful to have a robot serve water to the residents and to pe rsuade them to drink more since we tend to lose our sense for thirst when we get older. In order to determine what makes a robot persuasive\, we hav e carried out lab studies in which we tried out Cialdini's (1984) strategi es of influence\, such as social proof and appeals to authority (cf. also Winkle 2019). The results show that these strategies of influence are inde ed persuasive\, even if used by a robot\, and as far as the principle of s ocial proof is concerned\, it is more effective if the appeal is personali zed (cf. Goldstein et al. 1990).\\r\\nIn another experiment\, we took thes e findings into a field study where we found that the sequential placement of the social proof utterances matters\, as well as other context feature s (Jensen 2018). Furthermore\, the interactions show that the robot's othe r behaviors\, such as its eye gaze and body orientation\, contribute consi derably to how its utterances are received in general (Fischer et al. 2020 a). This is in line with our findings from another study in which we found that if the robot referred to previous discourse\, the situational contex t and the user's behavior\, its advice to drink more water was taken into account much more than if it didn't mention aspects of the context. These results together suggest that the robot's situatedness have a large effect on its persuasiveness.\\r\\nIn another set of experiments\, we tested the effects of the robot's speaking style and found that the robot's speech m elody also has a significant effect on the persuasiveness of robots (Fisch er et al. 2020b). Thus\, on top of the robot's situatedness\, also the per sonality it projects has a significant effect on how persuasive it is.\\r\ \nReferences\\r\\n Cialdini\, R.B. (2007). Influence: the psychology of p ersuasion (Revision Edition). Fischer\, Kerstin (2016): Designing Speech for a Recipient: The Roles of Partner Modeling\, Alignment and Feedback in So-Called ‘Simplified Registers’. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Fischer \, Kerstin\, Rosalyn Langedijk\, Lotte Damsgaard Nissen\, Eduardo Ruiz Ram irez & Oskar Palinko (2020). Gaze-Speech Coordination Inuences the Persuas iveness of Human-Robot Dialog in the Wild". In: International Conference o n Social Robotics. Springer. 2020\, pp. 157-169. Fischer\, Kerstin\, Nieb uhr\, Oliver\, Jensen\, Lars C. and Bodenhagen\, Leon (2020b): Speech Melo dy Matters – How robots can profit from using charismatic speech. ACM Tr ansactions in Human-Robot Interaction 9\, 1\, Article 4: 1-21. Fogg\, B.J . and Clifford Nass (1997). How users reciprocate to computers: an experim ent that demonstrates behavior change". In: CHI'97 extended abstracts on H uman factors in computing systems. 1997\, pp. 331-332. Goldstein\, Noah\, J.\, Robert B Cialdini\, and Vladas Griskevicius (2008). A room with a vi ewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hote ls". In: Journal of consumer Research 35.3 (2008)\, pp. 472-482. Ham\, Ja ap\, Raymond H Cuijpers\, and John-John Cabibihan (2015). Combining roboti c persuasive strategies: The persuasive power of a storytelling robot that uses gazing and gestures". In: International Journal of Social Robotics 7 .4 (2015)\, pp. 479-487. Jensen\, Lars C. (2018): Effects of Contingent R obot Response to the Situatedness of Human-Robot Interactions. Doktorarbei t\, University of Southern Denmark. Katie Winkle et al. (2019). Effective persuasion strategies for socially assistive robots". In: 2019 14th ACM/I EEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE. 2019\ , pp. 277-285. X-ALT-DESC:

Robots have been shown to be interacted with in social ways\, sometimes even as if they were humans\, which suggests that they may gene rally be able to persuade others just like people (e.g. Fogg &\; Nass 1 997\; Ham et al. 2015\; Fischer 2016). For instance\, in an elderly care f acility\, it may be useful to have a robot serve water to the residents an d to persuade them to drink more since we tend to lose our sense for thirs t when we get older. In order to determine what makes a robot persuasive\, we have carried out lab studies in which we tried out Cialdini's (1984) s trategies of influence\, such as social proof and appeals to authority (cf . also Winkle 2019). The results show that these strategies of influence a re indeed persuasive\, even if used by a robot\, and as far as the princip le of social proof is concerned\, it is more effective if the appeal is pe rsonalized (cf. Goldstein et al. 1990).

\n

In another experiment\, we took these findings into a field study where we found that the sequential placement of the social proof utterances matters\, as well as other conte xt features (Jensen 2018). Furthermore\, the interactions show that the ro bot's other behaviors\, such as its eye gaze and body orientation\, contri bute considerably to how its utterances are received in general (Fischer e t al. 2020a). This is in line with our findings from another study in whic h we found that if the robot referred to previous discourse\, the situatio nal context and the user's behavior\, its advice to drink more water was t aken into account much more than if it didn't mention aspects of the conte xt. These results together suggest that the robot's situatedness have a la rge effect on its persuasiveness.

\n

In another set of experiments\, we tested the effects of the robot's speaking style and found that the rob ot's speech melody also has a significant effect on the persuasiveness of robots (Fischer et al. 2020b). Thus\, on top of the robot's situatedness\, also the personality it projects has a significant effect on how persuasi ve it is.

\n

References

\n DTEND;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20210426T120000 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR