Robots Should Not be Anthropomorphic to

Interact with Humans Efficiently

In this era, the development in the world of robotics is growing rapidly.
Robots created even more each day, more sophisticated and more human likely.
A lot of human works can now be replaced by the existence of the robots. This is
also related to the development of computer programming which is getting
better each day.
The main aspect in design robot is to create a socially interactive robot.
The reason simply is to make humans can interact efficiently with robots. One
approach to enhance peoples acceptance of robots is the attempt to increase a
robots familiarity by using anthropomorphic (humanlike) design and human
social characteristics. This implies humanlike parts of a robots physical shape,
the usage of facial expressions and other social cues, as well as natural
humanlike interaction and communication such as speech and gestures.
However, the role of anthropomorphism in robotics is not to build an artificial
human but rather to take advantage of it as a mechanism through which social
interaction can be facilitated.
An underlying assumption is that humans prefer to interact with
machines in the same way that they interact with other people.
Anthropomorphism originates from the Greek anthropos for human
and morphe for shape or form. It describes peoples tendency to attribute
human characteristics to non-lifelike artifacts. The essence of
anthropomorphism is to imbue the imagined or real behavior of non-human
agents with human-like characteristics, motivations, intentions and emotions.
The last decade we experience an increasing demand for human-robot
interaction applications, so anthropomorphism becomes a necessity for two
main reasons, safety and social connection through robot likeability. Regarding
safety, it has been proved that human-like motion can be more easily interpreted
by humans. Nearly 140 years ago, Charles Darwin suggested anthropomorphism
as a necessary tool for efficiently understanding non-human agents. Thus, in
scenarios where human and robots cooperate advantageously in order to
execute a specific task. If robots move anthropomorphically, users can more
easily understand or even predict their motion and adjust accordingly their
activity, in order to avoid possible injuries. Regarding social connection through
robot likeability, the more human-like a robot is in terms of motion (coordinated
motion, synergistic behavior, etc.), appearance (form, synthetic skin, etc.),
expressions (facial), perceive intelligence, then the more easily will manage to
establish a solid social connection with human beings.
In the design of socially interactive robots, anthropomorphism plays an
important role and is reflected in the robots form (appearance), behavior
(motion) and interaction (modality). Robotics uses the mechanism to increase
acceptance of robots and facilitate interaction.

Anthropomorphic design means an imitation of human (or natural) form.

In robotics, anthropomorphic design refers to three parts: a robots shape,
behavior and interaction/communication with the human. Social robots make
further use of human social characteristics, such as ex-press/perceive
emotions, communicate with high-level dialogue, learn/recognize models of
other agents, establish/maintain social relationships, use natural cues (gaze,
gestures, etc.), exhibit distinctive personality and character, learn/develop social
competencies. One may ask how much human-likeness we want to have in nonhuman objects. How will people react to a robot that resembles a human? In
1970, Mashiro Mori formulated a theory called the uncanny valley. It describes
peoples reactions to technologies that resemble a human too close while still not
being one. Mori hypothesized that a persons response to a human-like robot
would abruptly shift from empathy to revulsion as it approached, but failed to
attain, a lifelike appearance.
On one hand, robots with humanlike design cues can elicit social
responses from humans which in turn can have a positive impact on acceptance.
People responded more positively to an artifact that displayed humanlike
behavioral characteristics (emotions, facial expression) in contrast to a purely
functional design. However, user preferences were task and context dependent.
Thus, the appearance of a robot should match its capabilities as well as the users
expectations. Anthropomorphizing a technological agent appears to create some
social connection to it, aids in learning how to use it, and how pleasant and
usable it is perceived. People preferred to collaborate with a robot that was able
to respond socially. On the other hand, robots that overuse anthropomorphic
form, such as humanoids that almost perfectly resemble a human but still remain
unnatural copies, can have a contrary effect and evoke fear or rejection.

Maximillian Calvin Septiady ()

191162106