For motion assistance humans prefer to rely on a robot rather than on an unpredictable human

31Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: The last decades have seen a surge of robots for physical training and work assistance. How to best control these interfaces is unknown, although arguably the interaction should be similar to human movement assistance. Methods: We compare the behaviour and assessment of subjects tracking a moving target with assistance from (i) trajectory guidance (as typically used in robots for physical training), (ii) a human partner, and (iii) the reactive robot partner of Takagi et al. Results: Trajectory guidance was recognised as robotic, while the robot partner was felt as human-like. However, trajectory guidance was preferred to assistance from a human partner, which was recognised as less predictable. The robot partner also was felt to be more predictable and helpful than a human partner, and was preferred. Conclusions: While subjects like to rely on predictable interaction, such as in trajectory guidance, the control reactivity of the robot partner is essential for perceiving an interaction as human-like.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ivanova, E., Carboni, G., Eden, J., Krüger, J., & Burdet, E. (2020). For motion assistance humans prefer to rely on a robot rather than on an unpredictable human. IEEE Open Journal of Engineering in Medicine and Biology, 1, 133–139. https://doi.org/10.1109/OJEMB.2020.2987885

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free