Silicon sycophants: the effects of computers that flatter
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Collaborative virtual environments
Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments
Experience as a moderator of the media equation: the impact of flattery and praise
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
The media equation and team formation: Further evidence for experience as a moderator
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Social reactions toward people vs. computers: How mere lables shape interactions
Computers in Human Behavior
Social Effects of Virtual Assistants. A Review of Empirical Results with Regard to Communication
IVA '08 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing
Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction
Social influence of a persuasive agent: the role of agent embodiment and evaluative feedback
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology
PERSUASIVE'10 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Persuasive Technology
PERSUASIVE'13 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Persuasive Technology
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Artificial social agents can influence people. However, artificial social agents are not real humans, and people may ascribe less agency to them. Would the persuasive power of a social robot diminish when people ascribe only little agency to it? To investigate this question, we performed an experiment in which participants performed tasks on a washing machine and received feedback from a robot about their energy consumption (e.g., "Your energy consumption is too high"), or factual, non-social feedback. This robot was introduced to participants as (a) an avatar (that was controlled a human in all its feedback actions; high agency), or as (b) an autonomous robot (that controlled its own feedback actions; moderate agency), or as (c) a robot that produced only random feedback; low agency). Results indicated that participants consumed less energy when a robotic social agent gave them feedback than when they received non-social feedback. This behavioral effect was independent of the level of robotic agency. In contrast, a perceived agency measure indicated that the random feedback robot was ascribed the lowest agency rating. These results suggest that the persuasive power of robot behavior is independent of the extent to which the persuadee explicitly ascribes agency to the agent.