PUB - Publikationen an der Universität Bielefeld

Social robots bear the potential to increase wellbeing by enabling social interaction. However, ambivalent attitudes toward robots may be among the reasons why to date, social robots are not yet widely accepted. Ambivalence, the simultaneous experience of strong positive and negative evaluations, is an unpleasant state that yields detrimental consequences on the affective, cognitive, and behavioural level. To gain insights into these dynamics, we conducted a preregistered experiment comparing two robots: Pepper and VIVA. 40 participants initially rated the design of both robots. Subsequently, they evaluated the newly developed robot VIVA based on a video featuring use cases for the robot. Moreover, ambivalence towards VIVA, VIVA’s perceived contributions to people’s wellbeing, perceived desirability of VIVA’s alleged functions were assessed. Finally, potential user groups were identified. Results showed that, VIVA’s design was perceived as adorable, high-quality, friendly, and sympathetic. However, comparing VIVA and Pepper, we found that Pepper was evaluated as more trustworthy, responsible, and intelligent than VIVA. VIVA was perceived as trustworthy but was deemed neither likeable nor accepted. As hypothesized, attitudes towards VIVA were ambivalent, implying that participants were torn between strong positive and strong negative evaluations of the robot. Participants did not expect VIVA to increase their wellbeing. Memory-based functions, such as reminder services or learning support and security functions, such as home surveillance or emergency call placement were evaluated as desirable. Our findings imply that a user-centred approach which addresses robot related ambivalence may increase robot acceptance.