Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
194 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Group Dynamics: Survey of Existing Multimodal Models and Considerations for Social Mediation (2306.17374v1)

Published 30 Jun 2023 in cs.RO and cs.HC

Abstract: Social mediator robots facilitate human-human interactions by producing behavior strategies that positively influence how humans interact with each other in social settings. As robots for social mediation gain traction in the field of human-human-robot interaction, their ability to "understand" the humans in their environments becomes crucial. This objective requires models of human understanding that consider multiple humans in an interaction as a collective entity and represent the group dynamics that exist among its members. Group dynamics are defined as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between group interactants. Since an individual's behavior may be deeply influenced by their interactions with other group members, the social dynamics existing within a group can influence the behaviors, attitudes, and opinions of each individual and the group as a whole. Therefore, models of group dynamics are critical for a social mediator robot to be effective in its role. In this paper, we survey existing models of group dynamics and categorize them into models of social dominance, affect, social cohesion, conflict resolution, and engagement. We highlight the multimodal features these models utilize, and emphasize the importance of capturing the interpersonal aspects of a social interaction. Finally, we make a case for models of relational affect as an approach that may be able to capture a representation of human-human interactions that can be useful for social mediation.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (55)
  1. G. Odekerken-Schröder, C. Mele, T. Russo-Spena, D. Mahr, and A. Ruggiero, “Mitigating loneliness with companion robots in the covid-19 pandemic and beyond: an integrative framework and research agenda,” Journal of Service Management, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 1149–1162, 2020.
  2. T. Belpaeme, J. Kennedy, A. Ramachandran, B. Scassellati, and F. Tanaka, “Social robots for education: A review,” Science robotics, vol. 3, no. 21, p. eaat5954, 2018.
  3. M. Niemelä and H. Melkas, “Robots as social and physical assistants in elderly care,” Human-centered digitalization and services, pp. 177–197, 2019.
  4. K. Lewin, “Field theory in social science: selected theoretical papers (edited by dorwin cartwright.).” 1951.
  5. J.-E. Lee and M. Shin, “How group dynamics affect team achievements in virtual environments,” International Journal of Contents, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 64–72, 2014.
  6. S. Strohkorb, I. Leite, N. Warren, and B. Scassellati, “Classification of children’s social dominance in group interactions with robots,” in Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 2015, pp. 227–234.
  7. A. Aiello, A. Tesi, F. Pratto, and A. Pierro, “Social dominance and interpersonal power: Asymmetrical relationships within hierarchy-enhancing and hierarchy-attenuating work environments,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 35–45, 2018.
  8. D. B. Jayagopi, H. Hung, C. Yeo, and D. Gatica-Perez, “Modeling dominance in group conversations using nonverbal activity cues,” IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 501–513, 2009.
  9. O. Aran and D. Gatica-Perez, “Fusing audio-visual nonverbal cues to detect dominant people in group conversations,” in 2010 20th International Conference on Pattern Recognition.   IEEE, 2010, pp. 3687–3690.
  10. H. Tennent, S. Shen, and M. Jung, “Micbot: A peripheral robotic object to shape conversational dynamics and team performance,” in 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 133–142.
  11. J. Xu, J. Broekens, K. Hindriks, and M. A. Neerincx, “Mood contagion of robot body language in human robot interaction,” Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 1216–1248, 2015.
  12. J. A. Russell, “A circumplex model of affect.” Journal of personality and social psychology, vol. 39, no. 6, p. 1161, 1980.
  13. V. Vonikakis, Y. Yazici, V. D. Nguyen, and S. Winkler, “Group happiness assessment using geometric features and dataset balancing,” in Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 2016, pp. 479–486.
  14. G. Sharma, S. Ghosh, and A. Dhall, “Automatic group level affect and cohesion prediction in videos,” in 2019 8th International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction Workshops and Demos (ACIIW).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 161–167.
  15. A. V. Carron, W. N. Widmeyer, and L. R. Brawley, “The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The group environment questionnaire,” Journal of Sport and Exercise psychology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 244–266, 1985.
  16. N. E. Friedkin, “Social cohesion,” Annu. Rev. Sociol., vol. 30, pp. 409–425, 2004.
  17. T. M. Loughead, K. Fransen, S. Van Puyenbroeck, M. D. Hoffmann, B. De Cuyper, N. Vanbeselaere, and F. Boen, “An examination of the relationship between athlete leadership and cohesion using social network analysis,” Journal of sports sciences, vol. 34, no. 21, pp. 2063–2073, 2016.
  18. L. Brawley, A. Carron, and W. Widmeyer, “The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The group environment questionnaire,” Journal of Sport Psychology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 244–266, 1985.
  19. D. Gatica-Perez, L. McCowan, D. Zhang, and S. Bengio, “Detecting group interest-level in meetings,” in Proceedings.(ICASSP’05). IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2005., vol. 1.   IEEE, 2005, pp. I–489.
  20. J. Cassell, A. Gill, and P. Tepper, “Coordination in conversation and rapport,” in Proceedings of the workshop on Embodied Language Processing, 2007, pp. 41–50.
  21. J. Gratch, A. Okhmatovskaia, F. Lamothe, S. Marsella, M. Morales, R. J. van der Werf, and L.-P. Morency, “Virtual rapport,” in Intelligent Virtual Agents: 6th International Conference, IVA 2006, Marina Del Rey, CA, USA, August 21-23, 2006. Proceedings 6.   Springer, 2006, pp. 14–27.
  22. A. Madan, R. Caneel, and A. Pentland, “Voices of attraction,” Augmented Cognition, HCI, 2005.
  23. N. Campbell, “Multimodal processing of discourse information; the effect of synchrony,” in 2008 Second International Symposium on Universal Communication.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 12–15.
  24. H. Hung and D. Gatica-Perez, “Estimating cohesion in small groups using audio-visual nonverbal behavior,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 563–575, 2010.
  25. S. G. Barsade, “The ripple effect: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior,” Administrative science quarterly, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 644–675, 2002.
  26. M. F. Jung, N. Martelaro, and P. J. Hinds, “Using robots to moderate team conflict: the case of repairing violations,” in Proceedings of the tenth annual ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, 2015, pp. 229–236.
  27. J. Costa, M. F. Jung, M. Czerwinski, F. Guimbretière, T. Le, and T. Choudhury, “Regulating feelings during interpersonal conflicts by changing voice self-perception,” in Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2018, pp. 1–13.
  28. S. Shen, P. Slovak, and M. F. Jung, “”stop. i see a conflict happening.” a robot mediator for young children’s interpersonal conflict resolution,” in Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, 2018, pp. 69–77.
  29. C. L. Sidner, C. Lee, C. D. Kidd, N. Lesh, and C. Rich, “Explorations in engagement for humans and robots,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 166, no. 1-2, pp. 140–164, 2005.
  30. J. Fan, L. C. Mion, L. Beuscher, A. Ullal, P. A. Newhouse, and N. Sarkar, “Sar-connect: a socially assistive robotic system to support activity and social engagement of older adults,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 1250–1269, 2021.
  31. H. Javed, R. Burns, M. Jeon, A. M. Howard, and C. H. Park, “A robotic framework to facilitate sensory experiences for children with autism spectrum disorder: A preliminary study,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 2019.
  32. S. M. Anzalone, S. Boucenna, S. Ivaldi, and M. Chetouani, “Evaluating the engagement with social robots,” International Journal of Social Robotics, vol. 7, pp. 465–478, 2015.
  33. M. F. Jung, J. J. Lee, N. DePalma, S. O. Adalgeirsson, P. J. Hinds, and C. Breazeal, “Engaging robots: easing complex human-robot teamwork using backchanneling,” in Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 2013, pp. 1555–1566.
  34. H. W. Park, M. Gelsomini, J. J. Lee, and C. Breazeal, “Telling stories to robots: The effect of backchanneling on a child’s storytelling,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, 2017, pp. 100–108.
  35. J. S. Smith, C. Chao, and A. L. Thomaz, “Real-time changes to social dynamics in human-robot turn-taking,” in 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2015, pp. 3024–3029.
  36. G. Skantze, “Predicting and regulating participation equality in human-robot conversations: Effects of age and gender,” in 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.   IEEE, 2017, pp. 196–204.
  37. S. Gillet, R. Cumbal, A. Pereira, J. Lopes, O. Engwall, and I. Leite, “Robot gaze can mediate participation imbalance in groups with different skill levels,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2021, pp. 303–311.
  38. N. Morgan, E. Fosler-Lussier, and N. Mirghafori, “Speech recognition using on-line estimation of speaking rate.” in Eurospeech, vol. 97.   Citeseer, 1997, pp. 2079–2082.
  39. P. Tarnowski, M. Kołodziej, A. Majkowski, and R. J. Rak, “Emotion recognition using facial expressions,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 108, pp. 1175–1184, 2017.
  40. W. Mou, O. Celiktutan, and H. Gunes, “Group-level arousal and valence recognition in static images: Face, body and context,” in 2015 11th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition (FG), vol. 5.   IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–6.
  41. B. Rim, N.-J. Sung, S. Min, and M. Hong, “Deep learning in physiological signal data: A survey,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 969, 2020.
  42. L. Shu, J. Xie, M. Yang, Z. Li, Z. Li, D. Liao, X. Xu, and X. Yang, “A review of emotion recognition using physiological signals,” Sensors, vol. 18, no. 7, p. 2074, 2018.
  43. P. Karthikeyan, M. Murugappan, and S. Yaacob, “A review on stress inducement stimuli for assessing human stress using physiological signals,” in 2011 IEEE 7th International Colloquium on Signal Processing and its Applications.   IEEE, 2011, pp. 420–425.
  44. E. Haapalainen, S. Kim, J. F. Forlizzi, and A. K. Dey, “Psycho-physiological measures for assessing cognitive load,” in Proceedings of the 12th ACM international conference on Ubiquitous computing, 2010, pp. 301–310.
  45. T. Sawabe, S. Honda, W. Sato, T. Ishikura, M. Kanbara, S. Yoshikawa, Y. Fujimoto, and H. Kato, “Robot touch with speech boosts positive emotions,” Scientific Reports, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2022.
  46. M. Swangnetr and D. B. Kaber, “Emotional state classification in patient–robot interaction using wavelet analysis and statistics-based feature selection,” IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 63–75, 2012.
  47. S. Strohkorb, E. Fukuto, N. Warren, C. Taylor, B. Berry, and B. Scassellati, “Improving human-human collaboration between children with a social robot,” in 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).   IEEE, 2016, pp. 551–556.
  48. J. R. Curhan, H. A. Elfenbein, and H. Xu, “What do people value when they negotiate? mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation.” Journal of personality and social psychology, vol. 91, no. 3, p. 493, 2006.
  49. M. F. Jung, “Coupling interactions and performance: Predicting team performance from thin slices of conflict,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1–32, 2016.
  50. L. Tan, K. Zhang, K. Wang, X. Zeng, X. Peng, and Y. Qiao, “Group emotion recognition with individual facial emotion cnns and global image based cnns,” in Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 2017, pp. 549–552.
  51. X. Guo, L. F. Polanía, and K. E. Barner, “Group-level emotion recognition using deep models on image scene, faces, and skeletons,” in Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 2017, pp. 603–608.
  52. A. A. Rasia-Filho, “Is there anything “autonomous” in the nervous system?” Advances in physiology education, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 9–12, 2006.
  53. J. Slaby, “Relational affect: perspectives from philosophy and cultural studies,” in How to do things with affects.   Brill, 2019, pp. 59–81.
  54. G. A. Van Kleef, C. K. De Dreu, and A. S. Manstead, “An interpersonal approach to emotion in social decision making: The emotions as social information model,” in Advances in experimental social psychology.   Elsevier, 2010, vol. 42, pp. 45–96.
  55. M. F. Jung, “Affective grounding in human-robot interaction,” in 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.   IEEE, 2017, pp. 263–273.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now