Anthropomorphic Social Robots as Meaning-Making Tools and Peer Models at School
Keywords:
anthropomorphism, meaning-making, educational robotics, safety educationAbstract
This paper discusses the use of anthropomorphic social robots in the area of safety education. The goal of the study was to investigate whether the use of anthropomorphic social robots increases learning efficiency, and if so, why. The underlying assumption was that anthropomorphic social robots may foster meaning-making due to their human-likeness, in particular a discrepancy between their human-like characteristics and the human frame of reference for such traits, and hence to improve learning efficiency. In particular, this paper discusses the results of a qualitative study conducted in four primary schools. The study has shown that the key role of the robot in increasing learning efficiency is not so much to convey information and help carrying out specific tasks as to increase interest, and hence, motivation to learn. Also, the key factors that shape a successful use of such robots in safety education concern as much pupils as teachers and go far beyond the robot as such.References
Alimisis, D. (2009). Teacher education on robotics-enhanced constructivist pedagogical methods. School of Pedagogical and Technological Education.
Alimisis, D. (2013). Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6 (1), 63-71.
Alimisis, D., Moro, M., Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K. (2007). Robotics & constructivism in education: The TERECoP project. Paper presented at the EuroLogo.
Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30 (2), 297-319.
Bartneck, C., Croft, E., Kulic, D. (2008). Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Metrics for Human-Robot Interaction Workshop in affiliation with the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2008).
Bazeley, P., Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Belpaeme, T., Baxter, P., De Greeff, J., Kennedy, J., Read, R., Looije, R., Zelati, M. C. (2013). Childrobot interaction: Perspectives and challenges. Paper presented at the International Conference on Social Robotics (ICSR2013).
Biesta, G. J. J. (1998). Mead, intersubjectivity, and education: The early writings. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 17 (2-3), 73-99. DOI: 10.1023/a:1005029131211.
Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101.
Breazeal, C. (2004). Designing sociable robots. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book.
Caporael, L. R. (1986). Anthropomorphism and mechanomorphism: Two faces of the human machine. Computers in Human Behavior, 2 (3), 215-234.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Duffy, B. R., Zawieska, K. (2012). Suspension of disbelief in social robotics. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN2012) France.
Dumont, H., D., I., Benavide, F. (2010). Educational research and innovation the nature of learning using research to inspire practice: Using research to inspire practice. OECD Publishing.
Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K., Aravecchia, L., Montel, L., Ionita, S., Arlegui, J., Fava, N. (2008). Representative examples of implementing educational robotics in school based on the constructivist approach. Paper presented at the SIMPAR Workshop on Teaching with robotics: didactic approaches and experiences, Venice, Italy.
Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., McDonald, D. G. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the Validity of Qualitative Studies.
Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 602-611.
Koerber, A., McMichael, L. (2008). Qualitative sampling methods. A primer for technical communicators. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22 (4), 454-473.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). Management and the learning process. California Management Review, 18 (3), 21-31.
La Torre, A., Mudyń, K., (2014). Uwarunkowania i psychologiczne konsekwencje antropomorfizacji. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia Psychologica, VII,57-68.
Marshall, C., Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Maxwell, J. A., Chmiel, M. (2014). Generalization in and from qualitative analysis. In: U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 540-553). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mead, G. H. (1900). Suggestions toward a theory of the philosophical disciplines. The Philosophical Review, 9 (1), 1-17. DOI: 10.2307/2176354.
Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Al Mahmud, A., Dong, J. J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education. Journal of Technology in Education and Learning, 1.
OECD. (2014). Measuring innovation in education. OECD Publishing.
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47 (11), 1451-1458.
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 63, 655-660.
Ryan, G. W., Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field methods, 15 (1), 85- 109.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Serholt, S., Barendregt, W., Leite, I., Hastie, H., Jones, A., Paiva, A., Castellano, G. (2014). Teachers’ views on the use of empathic robotic tutors in the classroom. Paper presented at the The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22 (2), 63-75.
Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative research. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences (Vol. 48). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Tonon, G. (2015). Qualitative studies in quality of life: Methodology and practice. Cham: Springer.
Westlund, J. K., Gordon, G., Spaulding, S., Lee, J. J., Plummer, L., Martinez, M., Breazeal, C. (2016). Lessons from teachers on performing HRI studies with young children in schools. Paper presented at the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI2016).
Alimisis, D. (2013). Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6 (1), 63-71.
Alimisis, D., Moro, M., Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K. (2007). Robotics & constructivism in education: The TERECoP project. Paper presented at the EuroLogo.
Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30 (2), 297-319.
Bartneck, C., Croft, E., Kulic, D. (2008). Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Metrics for Human-Robot Interaction Workshop in affiliation with the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2008).
Bazeley, P., Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Belpaeme, T., Baxter, P., De Greeff, J., Kennedy, J., Read, R., Looije, R., Zelati, M. C. (2013). Childrobot interaction: Perspectives and challenges. Paper presented at the International Conference on Social Robotics (ICSR2013).
Biesta, G. J. J. (1998). Mead, intersubjectivity, and education: The early writings. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 17 (2-3), 73-99. DOI: 10.1023/a:1005029131211.
Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101.
Breazeal, C. (2004). Designing sociable robots. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book.
Caporael, L. R. (1986). Anthropomorphism and mechanomorphism: Two faces of the human machine. Computers in Human Behavior, 2 (3), 215-234.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Duffy, B. R., Zawieska, K. (2012). Suspension of disbelief in social robotics. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN2012) France.
Dumont, H., D., I., Benavide, F. (2010). Educational research and innovation the nature of learning using research to inspire practice: Using research to inspire practice. OECD Publishing.
Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K., Aravecchia, L., Montel, L., Ionita, S., Arlegui, J., Fava, N. (2008). Representative examples of implementing educational robotics in school based on the constructivist approach. Paper presented at the SIMPAR Workshop on Teaching with robotics: didactic approaches and experiences, Venice, Italy.
Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., McDonald, D. G. (2011). Triangulation: Establishing the Validity of Qualitative Studies.
Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 602-611.
Koerber, A., McMichael, L. (2008). Qualitative sampling methods. A primer for technical communicators. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22 (4), 454-473.
Kolb, D. A. (1976). Management and the learning process. California Management Review, 18 (3), 21-31.
La Torre, A., Mudyń, K., (2014). Uwarunkowania i psychologiczne konsekwencje antropomorfizacji. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis. Studia Psychologica, VII,57-68.
Marshall, C., Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Maxwell, J. A., Chmiel, M. (2014). Generalization in and from qualitative analysis. In: U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 540-553). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Mead, G. H. (1900). Suggestions toward a theory of the philosophical disciplines. The Philosophical Review, 9 (1), 1-17. DOI: 10.2307/2176354.
Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Al Mahmud, A., Dong, J. J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education. Journal of Technology in Education and Learning, 1.
OECD. (2014). Measuring innovation in education. OECD Publishing.
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T. (2010). Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47 (11), 1451-1458.
Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 63, 655-660.
Ryan, G. W., Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field methods, 15 (1), 85- 109.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Serholt, S., Barendregt, W., Leite, I., Hastie, H., Jones, A., Paiva, A., Castellano, G. (2014). Teachers’ views on the use of empathic robotic tutors in the classroom. Paper presented at the The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22 (2), 63-75.
Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative research. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Stebbins, R. A. (2001). Exploratory research in the social sciences (Vol. 48). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Tonon, G. (2015). Qualitative studies in quality of life: Methodology and practice. Cham: Springer.
Westlund, J. K., Gordon, G., Spaulding, S., Lee, J. J., Plummer, L., Martinez, M., Breazeal, C. (2016). Lessons from teachers on performing HRI studies with young children in schools. Paper presented at the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI2016).
Downloads
Published
2016-12-01
How to Cite
Zawieska, K. ., Rynkiewicz, K. ., & Sprońska, A. (2016). Anthropomorphic Social Robots as Meaning-Making Tools and Peer Models at School. Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis Studia Psychologica, 9(1), 156–175. Retrieved from https://studia-psychologica.uken.krakow.pl/article/view/5630
Issue
Section
Articles
