This sub-section should describe the prototype (including the Wizard-of-Oz set-up and protocol). The next subsection describes the test of this prototype.
When writing about human-like gestures in robots, I would like to recommend this paper as an authority on non-verbal communication. The idea behind his paper is that Ekman divides non-verbal behaviour (and thus gestures) into 5 different groups, namely:
1. Emblems: these are culture-specific, such as the nodding in european cultures which means yes but in India it means no. This can be done by the NAO but it has to be reflected upon by us.
2.Illustrators: gestures which depict something clearly, like making a heart sign with your hands. Not relevant for the NAO as we use it.
3. Manipulators: manipulate body parts or objects, like chewing on a pencil. Also not for the NAO, even though I think we could pretend NAO is scraping it's head to signal it is reasoning on an answer, in case the database is slow.
4. Regulators: probably the most relevant to what we want to achieve with our gestures in the NAO, the regulators are used to signal conversation initiatiation, termination and turn-taking. Initiation is usually done by means of forward leans, walking toward someone, and making eye contact. Conversation termination behaviours include decreasing gaze, facing away, gathering possessions and looking at one’s watch or a clock. Maintaining a conversation can be done by maintaining gaze.
5. Emotional Expressions: ekman argues that these are not tied to culture but are present in all of human behaviour over the world.
Ekman, P. (2004). Emotional and Conversational Nonverbal Signals. In: Larrazabal, J.M., Miranda, L.A.P. (eds) Language, Knowledge, and Representation. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 99. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2783-3_3
It will then be an emblem (head nodding) which is culture-specific and will mainly apply to our stakeholders (being Dutch) which is a design choice.
The moving arms are illustrators. I suggest we add a third and a fourth which are true regulators (which are not culture-specific):following eye gaze while talking as a regulator of the conversation, looking away when leaving the conversation.
Project home
This sub-section should describe the prototype (including the Wizard-of-Oz set-up and protocol). The next subsection describes the test of this prototype.
Hi Mark, what do you exactly mean with the protocol? Isn't this information part of the test?
When writing about human-like gestures in robots, I would like to recommend this paper as an authority on non-verbal communication. The idea behind his paper is that Ekman divides non-verbal behaviour (and thus gestures) into 5 different groups, namely:
1. Emblems: these are culture-specific, such as the nodding in european cultures which means yes but in India it means no. This can be done by the NAO but it has to be reflected upon by us.
2.Illustrators: gestures which depict something clearly, like making a heart sign with your hands. Not relevant for the NAO as we use it.
3. Manipulators: manipulate body parts or objects, like chewing on a pencil. Also not for the NAO, even though I think we could pretend NAO is scraping it's head to signal it is reasoning on an answer, in case the database is slow.
4. Regulators: probably the most relevant to what we want to achieve with our gestures in the NAO, the regulators are used to signal conversation initiatiation, termination and turn-taking. Initiation is usually done by means of forward leans, walking toward someone, and making eye contact. Conversation termination behaviours include decreasing gaze, facing away, gathering possessions and looking at one’s watch or a clock. Maintaining a conversation can be done by maintaining gaze.
5. Emotional Expressions: ekman argues that these are not tied to culture but are present in all of human behaviour over the world.
Ekman, P. (2004). Emotional and Conversational Nonverbal Signals. In: Larrazabal, J.M., Miranda, L.A.P. (eds) Language, Knowledge, and Representation. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 99. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2783-3_3
Great suggestion JP! I have updated the text to include more information about the 5 principles described by Ekman.
So if we choose these two:
It will then be an emblem (head nodding) which is culture-specific and will mainly apply to our stakeholders (being Dutch) which is a design choice.
The moving arms are illustrators.
I suggest we add a third and a fourth which are true regulators (which are not culture-specific):following eye gaze while talking as a regulator of the conversation, looking away when leaving the conversation.
Also nodding can be a sign of back-channel which is a valuable item to add to our set of gestures, I updated that.