不仅怪异而且“不可思议”?人机交互研究多样性的系统综述。

IF 3.8 2区 计算机科学 Q2 ROBOTICS International Journal of Social Robotics Pub Date : 2023-03-08 DOI:10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4
Katie Seaborn, Giulia Barbareschi, Shruti Chandra
{"title":"不仅怪异而且“不可思议”?人机交互研究多样性的系统综述。","authors":"Katie Seaborn, Giulia Barbareschi, Shruti Chandra","doi":"10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Critical voices within and beyond the scientific community have pointed to a grave matter of concern regarding who is included in research and who is not. Subsequent investigations have revealed an extensive form of sampling bias across a broad range of disciplines that conduct human subjects research called \"WEIRD\": Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic. Recent work has indicated that this pattern exists within human-computer interaction (HCI) research, as well. How then does human-robot interaction (HRI) fare? And could there be other patterns of sampling bias at play, perhaps those especially relevant to this field of study? We conducted a systematic review of the premier ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2006-2022) to discover whether and how WEIRD HRI research is. Importantly, we expanded our purview to other factors of representation highlighted by critical work on inclusion and intersectionality as potentially underreported, overlooked, and even marginalized factors of human diversity. Findings from 827 studies across 749 papers confirm that participants in HRI research also tend to be drawn from WEIRD populations. Moreover, we find evidence of limited, obscured, and possible misrepresentation in participant sampling and reporting along key axes of diversity: sex and gender, race and ethnicity, age, sexuality and family configuration, disability, body type, ideology, and domain expertise. We discuss methodological and ethical implications for recruitment, analysis, and reporting, as well as the significance for HRI as a base of knowledge.</p>","PeriodicalId":14361,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Robotics","volume":" ","pages":"1-30"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9993363/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not Only WEIRD but \\\"Uncanny\\\"? A Systematic Review of Diversity in Human-Robot Interaction Research.\",\"authors\":\"Katie Seaborn, Giulia Barbareschi, Shruti Chandra\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Critical voices within and beyond the scientific community have pointed to a grave matter of concern regarding who is included in research and who is not. Subsequent investigations have revealed an extensive form of sampling bias across a broad range of disciplines that conduct human subjects research called \\\"WEIRD\\\": Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic. Recent work has indicated that this pattern exists within human-computer interaction (HCI) research, as well. How then does human-robot interaction (HRI) fare? And could there be other patterns of sampling bias at play, perhaps those especially relevant to this field of study? We conducted a systematic review of the premier ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2006-2022) to discover whether and how WEIRD HRI research is. Importantly, we expanded our purview to other factors of representation highlighted by critical work on inclusion and intersectionality as potentially underreported, overlooked, and even marginalized factors of human diversity. Findings from 827 studies across 749 papers confirm that participants in HRI research also tend to be drawn from WEIRD populations. Moreover, we find evidence of limited, obscured, and possible misrepresentation in participant sampling and reporting along key axes of diversity: sex and gender, race and ethnicity, age, sexuality and family configuration, disability, body type, ideology, and domain expertise. We discuss methodological and ethical implications for recruitment, analysis, and reporting, as well as the significance for HRI as a base of knowledge.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-30\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9993363/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Robotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ROBOTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Robotics","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-00968-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ROBOTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学界内外的批评声音指出了一个严重的问题,即谁被纳入研究,谁没有被纳入研究。随后的调查显示,在进行人类受试者研究的广泛学科中,存在着广泛的抽样偏见,这些学科被称为“怪异”:西方、受过教育、工业、富人和民主党。最近的工作表明,这种模式也存在于人机交互(HCI)研究中。那么,人机交互(HRI)进展如何?是否还有其他的抽样偏差模式在起作用,也许是那些与这一研究领域特别相关的模式?我们对首届ACM/IEEE人机交互国际会议(2006-2022)进行了系统回顾,以了解WEIRD HRI研究是否以及如何进行。重要的是,我们将研究范围扩大到了包容性和交叉性关键工作所强调的其他代表性因素,这些因素可能被低估、忽视、,甚至是人类多样性的边缘化因素。749篇论文中827项研究的结果证实,HRI研究的参与者也往往来自WEIRD人群。此外,我们发现,在参与者的抽样和报告中,有证据表明,在多样性的关键轴上:性别和性别、种族和民族、年龄、性取向和家庭结构、残疾、体型、意识形态和领域专业知识,存在有限、模糊和可能的失实陈述。我们讨论了招聘、分析和报告的方法论和伦理意义,以及HRI作为知识基础的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Not Only WEIRD but "Uncanny"? A Systematic Review of Diversity in Human-Robot Interaction Research.

Critical voices within and beyond the scientific community have pointed to a grave matter of concern regarding who is included in research and who is not. Subsequent investigations have revealed an extensive form of sampling bias across a broad range of disciplines that conduct human subjects research called "WEIRD": Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic. Recent work has indicated that this pattern exists within human-computer interaction (HCI) research, as well. How then does human-robot interaction (HRI) fare? And could there be other patterns of sampling bias at play, perhaps those especially relevant to this field of study? We conducted a systematic review of the premier ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2006-2022) to discover whether and how WEIRD HRI research is. Importantly, we expanded our purview to other factors of representation highlighted by critical work on inclusion and intersectionality as potentially underreported, overlooked, and even marginalized factors of human diversity. Findings from 827 studies across 749 papers confirm that participants in HRI research also tend to be drawn from WEIRD populations. Moreover, we find evidence of limited, obscured, and possible misrepresentation in participant sampling and reporting along key axes of diversity: sex and gender, race and ethnicity, age, sexuality and family configuration, disability, body type, ideology, and domain expertise. We discuss methodological and ethical implications for recruitment, analysis, and reporting, as well as the significance for HRI as a base of knowledge.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
8.50%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: Social Robotics is the study of robots that are able to interact and communicate among themselves, with humans, and with the environment, within the social and cultural structure attached to its role. The journal covers a broad spectrum of topics related to the latest technologies, new research results and developments in the area of social robotics on all levels, from developments in core enabling technologies to system integration, aesthetic design, applications and social implications. It provides a platform for like-minded researchers to present their findings and latest developments in social robotics, covering relevant advances in engineering, computing, arts and social sciences. The journal publishes original, peer reviewed articles and contributions on innovative ideas and concepts, new discoveries and improvements, as well as novel applications, by leading researchers and developers regarding the latest fundamental advances in the core technologies that form the backbone of social robotics, distinguished developmental projects in the area, as well as seminal works in aesthetic design, ethics and philosophy, studies on social impact and influence, pertaining to social robotics.
期刊最新文献
Immersive Commodity Telepresence with the AVATRINA Robot Avatar The Effects of Robot Managers’ Reward-Punishment Behaviours on Human–Robot Trust and Job Performance When is Human–Robot Joint Agency Effective? The Case of Cooperative Reaction Games Does Cultural Robotics Need Culture? Conceptual Fragmentation and the Problems of Merging Culture with Robot Design Observing the Interaction between a Socially-Assistive Robot and Residents in a Nursing Home
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1