It’s Not UAV, It’s Me: Demographic and Self-Other Effects in Public Acceptance of a Socially Assistive Aerial Manipulation System for Fatigue Management

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 16 Số 1 - Trang 227-243 - 2024
Jamy Li1, Mohsen Ensafjoo1
1Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada

Tóm tắt

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Aydin B (2019) Public acceptance of drones: knowledge, attitudes, and practice. Technol Soc 59:101180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101180

Clothier RA, Greer DA, Greer DG, Mehta AM (2015) Risk perception and the public acceptance of drones: risk perception and the public acceptance of drones. Risk Anal 35:1167–1183. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12330

Herdel V, Yamin LJ, Ginosar E, Cauchard JR (2021) Public drone: attitude towards drone capabilities in various contexts. In: proceedings of the 23rd international conference on mobile human-computer interaction. Association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–16

Li J, Janabi-Sharifi F (2022) Public opinion about the benefit, risk, and acceptance of aerial manipulation systems. IEEE Trans Human-Machine Syst 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2022.3164775

West R, Leskovec J, Potts C (2021) Postmortem memory of public figures in news and social media. PNAS 118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2106152118

Lidynia C, Philipsen R, Ziefle M (2017) Droning on about drones—acceptance of and perceived barriers to drones in civil usage contexts. In: Savage-Knepshield P, Chen J (eds) Advances in human factors in robots and unmanned systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 317–329

Komasová S (2021) Possible inspiration: drone-related literature and its potential for public perception research. J Intell Robot Syst 103:54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-021-01498-9

Ascensao T, Jamshidnejad A (2022) Autonomous socially assistive drones performing personalized dance movement therapy: an adaptive fuzzy-logic-based control approach for interaction with humans. IEEE Access 10:15746–15770. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3143992

Belmonte LM, García AS, Morales R et al (2021) Feeling of safety and comfort towards a socially assistive unmanned aerial vehicle that monitors people in a virtual home. Sensors 21:908. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21030908

Nomura T (2017) Robots and gender. Gend Genome 1:18–26. https://doi.org/10.1089/gg.2016.29002.nom

Tannenbaum C, Ellis RP, Eyssel F et al (2019) Sex and gender analysis improves science and engineering. Nature 575:137–146. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1657-6

Milner M, Mehta R, Winter SR et al (2021) Factors predicting patients’ willingness to use robotic dental services. Int J of Soc Robotics 13:1803–1821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00737-7

Bhat AS, Boersma C, Meijer MJ et al (2021) Plant robot for at-home behavioral activation therapy reminders to young adults with depression. J Hum-Robot Interact 10:20:1–2021. https://doi.org/10.1145/3442680

Lee HR, Tan H, Šabanović S (2016) That robot is not for me: Addressing stereotypes of aging in assistive robot design. In: 2016 25th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN). pp 312–317

Neven L (2010) ‘But obviously not for me’: robots, laboratories and the defiant identity of elder test users. Sociol Health Illn 32:335–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01218.x

Sharpe M, Wilks D (2002) Fatigue. BMJ 325:480–483. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7362.480

Johnson KL, Bamer AM, Yorkston KM, Amtmann D (2009) Use of cognitive aids and other assistive technology by individuals with multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabilitation: Assist Technol 4:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483100802239648

Sandler CX, Wyller VBB, Moss-Morris R et al (2021) Long COVID and post-infective fatigue syndrome: a review. Open Forum Infect Dis 8:ofab440. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofab440

Islam MF, Cotler J, Jason LA (2020) Post-viral fatigue and COVID-19: lessons from past epidemics. Fatigue: Biomed Health Behav 8:61–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/21641846.2020.1778227

Ricci JA, Chee E, Lorandeau AL, Berger J (2007) Fatigue in the U.S. workforce: prevalence and implications for lost productive work time. J Occup Environ Med 49:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.jom.0000249782.60321.2a

van Dijk FJH, Swaen GMH (2003) Fatigue at work. Occup Environ Med 60:i1–i2. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.suppl_1.i1

Albers E, Nijhof LN, van der Sprenkel EEB et al (2021) Effectiveness of internet-based cognitive behavior therapy (fatigue in teenagers on the internet) for adolescents with chronic fatigue syndrome in routine clinical care: observational study. J Med Internet Res 23:e24839. https://doi.org/10.2196/24839

Poznan University of Medical Sciences (2021) The use of a rehabilitation robot in patients with post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome. clinicaltrials.gov

Bonyan Khamseh H, Janabi-Sharifi F, Abdessameud A (2018) Aerial manipulation—A literature survey. Robot Auton Syst 107:221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2018.06.012

Suárez Fernández RA, Sanchez-Lopez JL, Sampedro C et al (2016) Natural user interfaces for human-drone multi-modal interaction. In: 2016 international conference on unmanned aircraft systems (ICUAS). pp 1013–1022

Yamazaki Y, Tamaki M, Premachandra C et al (2019) Victim detection using UAV with on-board voice recognition system. In: 2019 third IEEE international conference on robotic computing (IRC). pp 555–559

Baytas MA, Çay D, Zhang Y et al (2019) The design of social drones: a review of studies on autonomous flyers in inhabited environments. In: proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–13

Tezza D, Andujar M (2019) The state-of-the-art of human–drone interaction: a survey. IEEE access 7:167438–167454. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2953900

Avila M, Funk M, Henze N (2015) Drone navigator: using drones for navigating visually impaired persons. In: proceedings of the 17th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers & accessibility. Association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 327–328

Cauchard JR, E JL, Zhai KY, Landay JA (2015) Drone & me: an exploration into natural human-drone interaction. In: proceedings of the 2015 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing - UbiComp ’15. ACM Press, Osaka, Japan, pp 361–365

Haig-Ferguson A, Loades M, Whittle C et al (2019) It’s not one size fits all; the use of videoconferencing for delivering therapy in a specialist paediatric chronic fatigue service. Internet Interventions 15:43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2018.12.003

Bishop L, van Maris A, Dogramadzi S, Zook N (2019) Social robots: the influence of human and robot characteristics on acceptance. Paladyn. J Behav Rob 10:346–358. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2019-0028

Eißfeldt H, Vogelpohl V, Stolz M et al (2020) The acceptance of civil drones in Germany. CEAS Aeronaut J 11:665–676. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13272-020-00447-w

West JP, Klofstad CA, Uscinski JE, Connolly JM (2019) Citizen support for domestic drone use and regulation. Am Politics Res 47:119–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X18782208

Nomura T, Suzuki T, Kanda T et al (2011) Attitudes toward robots and factors influencing them. In: Dautenhahn K, Saunders J (eds) New frontiers in human-robot interaction. John Benjamins Publishing, pp 73–88

Kim S, Lee Y (2016) The Effect of robot programming education on attitudes towards robots. Indian J Sci Technol 9. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i24/96104

Davis FD (1985) A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR (1992) Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace1. J Appl Soc Psychol 22:1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x

Chen C, Xu X, Arpan L (2017) Between the technology acceptance model and sustainable energy technology acceptance model: investigating smart meter acceptance in the United States. Energy Res Social Sci 25:93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.12.011

Bensing JM, Hulsman RL, Schreurs KMG (1999) Gender differences in fatigue: biopsychosocial factors relating to fatigue in men and women. Med Care 37:1078–1083

Junghaenel DU, Christodoulou C, Lai J-S, Stone AA (2011) Demographic correlates of fatigue in the US general population: results from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) initiative. J Psychosom Res 71:117–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2011.04.007

Rogers SR, Singh KK, Mathews AJ, Cummings AR (2022) Drones and geography: who is using them and why? Prof Geogr 74:516–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2021.2000446

Chappelle W, Goodman T, Reardon L, Thompson W (2014) An analysis of post-traumatic stress symptoms in United States air force drone operators. J Anxiety Disord 28:480–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.05.003

Deutsch I, Erel H, Paz M et al (2019) Home robotic devices for older adults: opportunities and concerns. Comput Hum Behav 98:122–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.002

Lee HR, Riek LD (2018) Reframing assistive robots to promote successful aging. J Hum-Robot Interact 7:11:1–1123. https://doi.org/10.1145/3203303

Goldberg LR (1981) Unconfounding situational attributions from uncertain, neutral, and ambiguous ones: a psychometric analysis of descriptions of oneself and various types of others. J Personal Soc Psychol 41:517–552. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.3.517

Igou ER (2008) How long will I suffer? Versus how long will you suffer? A self-other effect in affective forecasting. J Personal Soc Psychol 95:899–917. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011619

Vural Doğru B, Utli H, Şenuzun Aykar F (2021) Effect of therapeutic touch on daytime sleepiness, stress and fatigue among students of nursing and midwifery: a randomized sham-controlled trial. Complement Ther Clin Pract 43:101322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctcp.2021.101322

Cramer HS, Kemper NA, Amin A, Evers V (2009) The effects of robot touch and proactive behaviour on perceptions of human-robot interactions. In: proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on human robot interaction. ACM, pp 275–276

Li JJ, Ju W, Reeves B (2017) Touching a mechanical body: tactile contact with body parts of a humanoid robot is physiologically arousing. J Hum-Robot Interact 6:118–130. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.6.3.Li

Abtahi P, Landry B, Yang J (Junrui) et al (2019) Beyond the force: using quadcopters to appropriate objects and the environment for haptics in virtual reality. In: proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, Glasgow Scotland Uk, pp 1–13

Woods SN, Walters ML, Koay KL, Dautenhahn K (2006) Methodological issues in HRI: a comparison of live and video-based methods in robot to human approach direction trials. In: robot and human interactive communication, 2006. ROMAN 2006. The 15th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, pp 51–58

Weisberg H, Weisberg PHF, Krosnick JA, Bowen BD (1996) An introduction to survey research, polling, and data analysis. SAGE

Sanches P, Janson A, Karpashevich P et al (2019) HCI and affective health: taking stock of a decade of studies and charting future research directions. In: proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Association for computing machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp 1–17

Schulz T, Torresen J, Herstad J (2019) Animation techniques in human-robot interaction user studies: a systematic literature review. J Hum-Robot Interact 8:12:1–1222. https://doi.org/10.1145/3317325

Takayama L, Dooley D, Ju W (2011) Expressing thought: improving robot readability with animation principles. In: proceedings of the 6th international conference on human-robot interaction - HRI ’11. ACM Press, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp 69–76

Li J, Chignell M (2011) Communication of emotion in social robots through simple head and arm movements. Int J Social Robot 3:125–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0071-x

Frikkel J, Götte M, Beckmann M et al (2020) Fatigue, barriers to physical activity and predictors for motivation to exercise in advanced cancer patients. BMC Palliat Care 19:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-020-00542-z

Salimzadeh Z, Damanabi S, Kalankesh LR, Ferdousi R (2019) Mobile applications for multiple sclerosis: a focus on self-management. Acta Inf Med 27:12–18. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2019.27.12-18

Zetzl T, Pittig A, Renner A et al (2021) Yoga therapy to reduce fatigue in cancer: effects of reminder e-mails and long-term efficacy. Support Care Cancer 29:7725–7735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06345-z

Wagner LI, Cella D (2004) Fatigue and cancer: causes, prevalence and treatment approaches. Br J Cancer 91:822–828. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602012

Havervall S, Rosell A, Phillipson M et al (2021) Symptoms and functional impairment assessed 8 months after mild COVID-19 among Health Care workers. JAMA 325:2015–2016. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.5612

Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Personal Soc Psychol 51:1173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manage Sci 46:186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926

Walters ML, Syrdal DS, Dautenhahn K et al (2008) Avoiding the uncanny valley: robot appearance, personality and consistency of behavior in an attention-seeking home scenario for a robot companion. Auton Robots 24:159–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-007-9058-3

Woods S, Walters M, Kheng Lee Koay, Dautenhahn K (2006) Comparing human robot interaction scenarios using live and video based methods: towards a novel methodological approach. In: 9th IEEE international workshop on advanced motion control, 2006. IEEE, Istanbul, Turkey, pp 750–755

Li J, Ju W, Nass C (2015) Observer perception of dominance and mirroring behavior in human-robot relationships. In: proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction. ACM, pp 133–140

Rogers E (1962) Diffusion of innovation. The Free Press, New York

Peterson E, Iyengar S (2021) Partisan gaps in political information and information-seeking behavior: motivated reasoning or cheerleading? Am J Polit Sci 65:133–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12535

Memmott T, Carley S, Graff M, Konisky DM (2021) Sociodemographic disparities in energy insecurity among low-income households before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat Energy 6:186–193. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-00763-9

Leckelt M, Wetzel E, Gerlach TM et al (2018) Validation of the narcissistic admiration and rivalry questionnaire short scale (NARQ-S) in convenience and representative samples. Psychol Assess 30:86–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000433

Markowitz EM, Nisbet MC, Danylchuk AJ, Engelbourg SI (2017) What’s that buzzing noise? public opinion on the use of drones for conservation science. Bioscience 67:382–385. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix003

Yoo W, Yu E, Jung J (2018) Drone delivery: factors affecting the public’s attitude and intention to adopt. Telematics Inform 35:1687–1700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.04.014