4.4 Article

Infants' Prediction of Humanoid Robot's Goal-Directed Action

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL ROBOTICS
Volume 15, Issue 8, Pages 1387-1397

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12369-022-00941-7

Keywords

Infants; Goal-directed action; Action prediction; Humanoid robot; Robot's face

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found that 17-month-old infants can anticipate goal-directed actions of both humans and humanoid robots, with no differences in anticipatory gaze behavior between the two agents. Additionally, infants showed a higher attentional preference for the robot's face compared to the human's face.
Several studies have shown that infants anticipate human goal-directed actions, but not robot's ones. However, the studies focusing on the robot goal-directed actions have mainly analyzed the effect of mechanical arms on infant's attention. To date, the prediction of goal-directed actions in infants has not yet been studied when the agent is a humanoid robot. Given this lack of evidence in infancy research, the present study aims at analyzing infants' action anticipation of both a human's and a humanoid robot's goal-directed action. Data were acquired on thirty 17-month-old infants, watching four video clips, where either a human or a humanoid robot performed a goal-directed action, i.e. reaching a target. Infants looking behavior was measured through the eye-tracking technique. The results showed that infants anticipated the goal-directed action of both the human and the robot and there were no differences in the anticipatory gaze behavior between the two agents. Furthermore, the findings indicated different attentional patterns for the human and the robot, showing a greater attention paid to the robot's face than the human's face. Overall, the results suggest that 17-month-old infants may infer also humanoid robot' underlying action goals.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available