지능정보연구 (Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems)

  • 제29권1호
  • /
  • Pages.397-412
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2288-4866(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-4882(eISSN)
한국지능정보시스템학회 (Korea Intelligent Information System Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

소셜 로봇 외형 디자인에 대한 소비자 감성에 관한 연구: 다차원 척도법 (MDS)과 군집분석을 중심으로

A Study on Consumer Emotion for Social Robot Appearance Design: Focusing on Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) and Cluster Analysis

  • 유성훈 (국민대학교 비즈니스IT전문대학원) ;
  • 윤지찬 (국민대학교 비즈니스IT전문대학원) ;
  • 이준식 (국민대학교 비즈니스IT전문대학원) ;
  • 박도형 (국민대학교 비즈니스IT전문대학원/경영정보학부)
  • Seong-Hun Yu (Graduate School of Business IT, Kookmin University) ;
  • Ji-Chan Yun (Graduate School of Business IT, Kookmin University) ;
  • Junsik Lee (Graduate School of Business IT, Kookmin University) ;
  • Do-Hyung Park (Graduate School of Business IT/School of Management Information Systems, Kookmin University)
  • 투고 : 2023.03.14
  • 심사 : 2023.03.30
  • 발행 : 2023.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

소셜 로봇이 인간의 일상생활에 자리매김하기 위해서는 소셜 로봇의 기술적 구현과 소셜 로봇을 바라보는 인간의 심리를 함께 고려하는 것이 중요하다. 본 연구는 소셜 로봇의 외형 디자인에 대해 소비자가 느끼는 감성에 기반하여 잠재적인 소셜 로봇 군집을 도출하고, 각 군집이 갖는 중요한 디자인적 특징 및 감성 차이를 식별 및 비교하고자 하였다. 소셜 로봇에 대해 소비자가 느끼는 감성을 측정 및 평가하기 위한 소셜 로봇 감성 프레임워크를 구축하고, 감성공학적 접근방법인 의미분별척도법에 기반해 소셜 로봇 디자인 감성을 평가하였다. 감성 평가 결과를 토대로 다차원 척도법과 K-means 군집분석을 실시하여 30개의 소셜 로봇을 4개의 군집으로 분류하였으며, 각 군집 별 디자인 요소의 특징을 확인하고, 소비자 감성을 비교 분석하였다. 각 군집 별로 도출된 디자인적 특징 및 감성 차이를 바탕으로 인간중심적 관점에서 성공적인 소셜 로봇 디자인 및 개발을 위한 전략적 방향을 제언하였다.

In order for social robots to take root in human life, it is important to consider the technical implementation of social robots and human psychology toward social robots. This study aimed to derive potential social robot clusters based on the emotions consumers feel about social robot appearance design, and to identify and compare important design characteristics and emotional differences of each cluster. In our study, we established a social robot emotion framework to measure and evaluate the emotions consumers feel about social robots, and evaluated the emotions of social robot designs based on the semantic differential method, an kansei engineering approach. We classified 30 social robots into 4 clusters by conducting a multidimensional scaling method and K-means cluster analysis based on the emotion evaluation results, confirmed the characteristics of design elements for each cluster, and conducted a comparative analysis on consumer emotions. We proposed a strategic direction for successful social robot design and development from a human-centered perspective based on the design characteristics and emotional differences derived for each cluster.

키워드

과제정보

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020R1A2C1006001).

참고문헌

  1. Bannon, L. (2011) Reimagining HCI: toward a more human-centered perspective. Interactions, 18 (4), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978822.1978833
  2. Breazeal, C. (2003). Emotion and sociable humanoid robots. International journal of human-computer studies, 59 (1-2), 119-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00018-1
  3. Chaudhuri, A. (2006). Emotion and reason in consumer behavior. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.
  4. De Santis, A., Siciliano, B., De Luca, A., & Bicchi, A. (2008). An atlas of physical human-robot interaction. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 43(3), 253-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2007.03.003
  5. Duffy, V. G. (2016). Modern human-robot interaction in smart services and value co-creation. In International Conference on Digital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  6. Eom, S. (2009). Author Cocitation Analysis: Quantitative Methods for Mapping the Intellectual Structure of an Academic Discipline. PA, USA: IGI Global.
  7. Ha, S., Lee, J., Yoo, I. J., & Park, D. H. (2021). Different Look, Different Feel: Social Robot Design Evaluation Model Based on ABOT Attributes and Consumer Emotions. Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems, 27(2), 55-78.
  8. Hoffman, G. (2019). Anki, Jibo, and Kuri: What we can learn from social robots that didn't make it. IEEE Spectrum. https://spectrum.ieee.org/anki-jibo-and-kuri-what-we-can-learn-from-social-robotics-failures
  9. Hwang, J., Park, T., & Hwang, W. (2013). The effects of overall robot shape on the emotions invoked in users and the perceived personalities of robot. Applied ergonomics, 44 (3), 459-471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.10.010
  10. Jaimes, A., Sebe, N., & Gatica-Perez, D. (2006). Human-centered computing: a multimedia perspective. In Proceedings of the 14th ACM international conference on Multimedia, Santa Barbara, CA, USA.
  11. Kuhnert, B., Ragni, M., & Lindner, F. (2017). The gap between human's attitude towards robots in general and human's expectation of an ideal everyday life robot. In 2017 26th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), Lisbon, Portugal.
  12. Lee, J., & Park, D. H. (2021). Are you a Machine or Human?: The Effects of Human-likeness on Consumer Anthropomorphism Depending on Construal Level. Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems, 27(1), 129-149.
  13. Lee, J., Yoo, I. J., & Park, D. H. (2019). Implementation strategy for the elderly care solution based on usage log analysis: focusing on the case of Hyodol product. Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems, 25(3), 117-140.
  14. Massimiliano, S., Maria, V. G., & Ferdinando, F. (2005). Robots in a domestic setting: a psychological approach. Universal Access in the Information Society, 4(2), 146-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-005-0118-1
  15. Nagamachi, M. (2011). Kansei/affective engineering. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC press.
  16. Norman, D. (2013). The Design of Everyday Things. NY, USA: Basic Books.
  17. Osawa, H., & Imai, M. (2010). Interaction between a Human and an Anthropomorphized Object. London, UK: IntechOpen.
  18. Phillips, E., Zhao, X., Ullman, D., & Malle, B. F. (2018). What is human-like? decomposing robots' human-like appearance using the anthropomorphic robot (abot) database. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, Chicago, IL, USA.
  19. Shiizuka, H., & Hashizume, A. (2011). The role of kansei/affective engineering and its expected in aging society. In Intelligent Decision Technologies: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Intelligent Decision Technologies (IDT'2011), Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.
  20. Shin, D.-J. (2014). Human Robot Interaction: ICRA 2014 Research Trend. Korea robotics society review, 11(4), 29-35.
  21. Sun, X., Houssin, R., Renaud, J., & Gardoni, M. (2019). A review of methodologies for integrating human factors and ergonomics in engineering design. International Journal of Production Research, 57 (15-16), 4961-4976. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2018.1492161
  22. Taherdoost, H. (2019). What is the best response scale for survey and questionnaire design; review of different lengths of rating scale/attitude scale/Likert scale. Hamed Taherdoost, 1-10.
  23. Westbrook, R. A., & Oliver, R. L. (1991). The dimensionality of consumption emotion patterns and consumer satisfaction. Journal of consumer research, 18(1), 84-91.
  24. You, E. S., & Cho, M. R. (2018). The ethics of robots and humans in the post-human age. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 18(3), 592-600.  https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2018.18.03.592