↓ Skip to main content

Preferred Interaction Styles for Human-Robot Collaboration Vary Over Tasks With Different Action Types

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurorobotics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Preferred Interaction Styles for Human-Robot Collaboration Vary Over Tasks With Different Action Types
Published in
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnbot.2018.00036
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruth Schulz, Philipp Kratzer, Marc Toussaint

Abstract

How do humans want to interact with collaborative robots? As robots become more common and useful not only in industry but also in the home, they will need to interact with humans to complete many varied tasks. Previous studies have demonstrated that autonomous robots are often more efficient and preferred over those that need to be commanded, or those that give instructions to humans. We believe that the types of actions that make up a task affect the preference of participants for different interaction styles. In this work, our goal is to explore tasks with different action types together with different interaction styles to find the specific situations in which different interaction styles are preferred. We have identified several classifications for table-top tasks and have developed a set of tasks that vary along two of these dimensions together with a set of different interaction styles that the robot can use to choose actions. We report on results from a series of human-robot interaction studies involving a PR2 completing table-top tasks with a human. The results suggest that people prefer robot-led interactions for tasks with a higher cognitive load and human-led interactions for joint actions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Student > Master 11 16%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 20 29%
Computer Science 10 15%
Psychology 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Unspecified 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 24 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 May 2022.
All research outputs
#13,383,945
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#246
of 887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,713
of 328,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 887 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.