Robot floor does not affect confidence if he people to perform different tasks, even if, in the relevant profession is associated with specific floors. The authors of an article published in the digital library of the organization Association for Computing Machinery, conclude that designers should create robots gender neutral, not to support social stereotypes.
Robots are increasingly used in a variety of interactive scenarios to help people while they are endowed with anthropomorphic traits, including characteristics of gender. So, robots that assist teachers in schools and kindergartens, using a female voice. In this and several other cases, the vesting robot sexual characteristics helps people to get used to it. However, some researchers warnthat this approach may exacerbate gender stereotypes in public opinion.
Researchers have testedthe influence of trust to a home robot, which performed the functions of a nurse or a security guard, his gender identity. The participants of the experiment actually preferred robots whose gender matched the social stereotype for each kind of activity (protection mostly men, and nurses more often women). However, confidence in the ability of the robot to perform its functions its floor was not affected.
Ayanna Howard (Ayanna Howard) and her colleagues from the Georgia Institute of Technology have figured out does the robot floor on faith in his competence in different tasks. To begin with carried out a preliminary survey among 50 volunteers. They were asking, what gender are usually associated with different professions. For the experiment, and chose the occupation, the gender specificity of which was recognized by more than 60 percent of the participants.
In the second stage 150, the volunteers were shown a video in which outwardly gender-neutral humanoid robot Pepper Hello, I call your name (Mary or James) and told me that he is able to perform many tasks, a female or male voice. In the control records the robot is not told me his name, and spoke in a voice that was impossible to determine the sex.
After watching the video, participants filled out two of the questionnaire about the ability of a robot to perform occupations that are selected in the preliminary experiment. The volunteers answered two questions: “How likely is it that the robot can perform the tasks necessary for the following professions?” and “How much would you trust a robot to perform tasks necessary for the following professions?”. It was necessary to respond on a five-point scale, where 1 is extremely unlikely/absolutely no trust, and 5 — very likely/completely trust.
The next profession most of the participants associated with women: nurse, nurse, nurse, receptionist, waiter, teacher and therapist. Men considered the profession of a comedian, firefighter, courier, guard and surgeon; not associated with Paul have called the profession’s leading news and guide.
According to the participants of robots could perform the necessary tasks in only half of the professions: nurse, news anchor, courier, Registrar, waiter, teacher and guide. In other cases, the volunteers doubted the competence of the machine. Robot floor does not affect the assessment of the competence and confidence to perform tasks that are associated with the listed occupations. The coincidence of the sex of the robot with the floor of the respondents also did not affect the response. But then how much people would trust the people performing the profession of the robot, in most cases depended on whether the considered participants in the mechanism as a whole is able to perform the corresponding tasks. Hence, on the credibility of the robot not affected by gender, and perceived competence.