Human Robot Interaction An Introduction 08 Emotion

© copyright by Christoph Bartneck, Tony Belpaeime, Friederike Eyssel, Takayuki Kanda, Merel Keijsers, and Selma Sabanovic 2019.
https://www.human-robot-interaction.org
Emotion
What is covered in this chapter:

• The difference between affect, emotions, and mood;
• What roles emotions play in interacting with other humans and
robots;
• Basic models of emotions;
• The challenges in emotion processing.
How are you feeling right now? Happy? Bored? A bit self-conscious?
Whatever the case may be, it’s unlikely that you are feeling absolutely
nothing. Various feeling states, and related emotions, are a key as-
pect of our day-to-day experience and of our interactions with other
people. Emotions can motivate and modulate behavior and are a neces-
sary component of human cognition and behavior. They can be spread
through vicarious experience, such as watching a tense movie, and di-
rect social interaction, such as seeing your best friend happy. Because
emotions are such an integral part of human social cognition, they
are also an important topic in human–robot interaction (HRI). Social
robots are often designed to interpret human emotion, to express emo-
tions, and at times, even to have some form of synthetic emotion driving
their behavior. Although emotions are not implemented in each and ev-
ery social robot, taking emotions into account in the design of a robot
can help improve the intuitiveness of the human–robot interaction.
8.1 What are emotions, mood, and affect?

From an evolutionary perspective, emotions are necessary for survival
because they help individuals respond to environmental factors that
either promote or threaten survival (Lang et al., 1997). As such, they
prepare the body for behavioral responses, help in decision-making, and
facilitate interpersonal interaction. Emotions arise as an appraisal of
different situations that people encounter (Gross, 2007; Lazarus, 1991).
For example, when another person shoves us out of the way to be first
in line, we get angry, and our bodies prepare for a potential conflict: the
adrenaline makes us more prone to undertake action, and our expression
114
This material has been published by Cambridge University Press as Human Robot Interaction by
Christoph Bartneck, Tony Belpaeime, Friederike Eyssel, Takayuki Kanda, Merel Keijsers, and Selma Sabanovic.
ISBN: 9781108735407 (http://www.cambridge.org/9781108735407).
This pre-publication version is free to view and download for personal use only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works.
8.1 What are emotions, mood, and affect? 115
signals to the other person that he or she crossed a line. Conversely,

upon finding out our friend did not invite us to his or her birthday
party, sadness hampers quick action, forcing us to reconsider our prior
behaviour (i.e., what did we do or say that may have offended him or
her?) and evokes empathetic responses from others (Bonanno et al.,
2008). In this way, emotions can also help us modulate the behaviors
of others in an interaction.
Affect is used as a comprehensive term that encompasses the entire
spectrum of emotionally laden responses, ranging from quick and sub-
conscious responses caused by an external event to complex moods,
such as love, that linger for longer (e.g., Lang et al., 1997; Bonanno
et al., 2008; Beedie et al., 2005). Within affect, a distinction is made
between emotions and moods (Beedie et al., 2005).
Emotions are usually seen as being caused by an identifiable source,
such as an event or seeing emotions in other people. They are often
externalized and directed at a specific object or person. For example,
you experience happiness when getting a promotion at work, get angry
when your phone’s battery dies during an important call, or experience
a pang of jealousy when a colleague gets a company car and you do
not (Beedie et al., 2005). Emotions are also shorter-lived than moods
(Gendolla, 2000). Moods are more diffuse and internal, often lack a
clear cause and object (Ekkekakis, 2013; Russell and Barrett, 1999),
and instead are the result of an interaction between environmental,
incidental, and cognitive processes—such as the apprehensive mood
while waiting a week to hear about the medical test results or the
warm feeling of a sunny week spent in the company of friends.
8.1.1 Emotion and interaction

Emotions are not just internal; they are also a universal communication
channel that has helped us communicate internal affective states to
others and have likely been very important to our survival as a species.
Your emotions provide the outside world with information about
your internal affective state, which is helpful to others in two ways.
First, emotions convey information about you and your potential fu-
ture actions. For example, displaying anger and frustration signals to
others that you may be preparing for an aggressive response. In ad-
dition, emotions can convey information about the environment. An
expression of fear may alert others around you of a fast-approaching
grizzly bear before you have even found time to scream. In both scenar-
ios, emotion provides an incentive for others to take action. In the case
of anger, someone may choose to step down and attempt to suss the
situation. In the case of fear, other people will likely scan the environ-
ment for a threat (Keltner and Kring, 1998). In this way, the successful
communication of emotions promotes survival, enhances social bonds,
116 Emotion
and minimizes the chances of social rejection and interpersonal physical

aggression (Andersen and Guerrero, 1998).
8.2 Understanding human emotions

Since antiquity, people have given names to the numerous emotions
we experience. Aristotle believed there to be 14 different emotions,
including anger, love, and mildness. Ekman lists 15 basic emotions,
including pride in achievement, relief, satisfaction, sensory pleasure,
and shame Ekman (1999). It is impossible to provide a definite list
of emotions because they vary between people and cultures, language
does not offer a perfect mapping to emotions, and some emotions show
overlap. Still, some emotions are likely to be considered more universal
than others. Anger, sadness, and happiness are likely candidates for a
set of core emotions. Ekman and Friesen (1975), in their seminal work
on the facial expression of emotions, listed six basic facial expressions
that are recognized across cultures. These facial expressions have often
been mistaken for a set of basic emotions we experience, although they
were only ever intended to describe a basic set of emotions that we
express via our faces and that are recognized by different cultures.
Although many scholars distinguish between basic, or primary, emo-
tions and reactive, or secondary, emotions, no consensus has been reached
yet on which emotions are to be included in the first category and which
should be considered secondary (Holm, 1999; Greenberg, 2008), and
some scholars argue that basic emotions do not exist at all (see, e.g.,
Ortony and Turner, 1990). For those who do agree on the existence of
basic emotions, primary emotions are considered to be universal across
cultures (Stein and Oatley, 1992) and to be quick, gut-level responses
(Greenberg, 2008) and include emotions such as amusement, anger,
surprise, disgust, and fear. Secondary emotions, on the other hand, are
reactive and reflective. They differ across cultures (Kemper, 1987). For
example, pride, remorse, and guilt are secondary emotions.
But there have been challenges to the idea of emotions being dis-
tinct categories. Russell (1980) argued that emotions are the cognitive
interpretations of sensations that are the product of two independent
neurophysiological systems, namely, arousal and valence. As such, emo-
tions are spread across a two-dimensional continuum rather than being
composed of a set of discrete, independent basic emotions (Posner et al.,
2005) (see Figure 8.4). This model has been widely studied and con-
firmed to hold across different languages and cultures (Russell et al.,
1989; Larsen and Diener, 1992). However, a meta-analysis found that al-
though the model makes for a reasonable representation of self-reported
affect, not all affective states fall into the expected regions as predicted
by the theory, and some cannot even be consistently ascribed to any
8.3 When emotions go wrong 117
of the regions, suggesting that assumptions about the nature of some

affective states may need to be revised (Remington et al., 2000).
8.3 When emotions go wrong

The importance of emotions in social interactions becomes especially
clear when one partner fails to understand the emotion of the other
partner or fails to respond with the proper emotion. Even tiny glitches
in providing an adequate emotional response in social interaction can
have serious consequences. For example, misinterpreting sarcasm for a
genuine response can lead to misunderstandings in the conversation and
hurt feelings. The situation becomes more problematic when someone
is consistently unable to adequately perceive, express, or respond to
affective states
Problems with emotional responsiveness are one of the defining symp-
toms of, for example, depression (Joormann and Gotlib, 2010). Al-
though depressed individuals are able to understand the way others
are feeling and can express their own emotional state, they have a
reduced emotional response to positive stimuli, such as rewards (Piz-
zagalli et al., 2009), and have recurring negative thoughts about the
past, present, and future. As a consequence, a depressed individual’s
patterns of social interaction often result in social isolation and even
more loneliness, feeding into the individual’s already frail psychological
state.
Furthermore, people might be incapable of recognizing, expressing,
and interpreting another person’s emotions. For example, people with
autism spectrum disorders may find it difficult to correctly interpret
displays of emotion (Rutherford and Towns, 2008; Blair, 2005). This is
clearly problematic for everyday social interactions because the affected
person cannot intuitively understand the needs of his or her interaction
partners and will often respond inappropriately.
Furthermore, people may have trouble expressing their emotional
state, for example, when their facial muscles are impaired after a stroke.
This makes it hard for their interaction partners to infer their internal
states and form an idea of what they mean.
A person’s inability to express and interpret emotions comes with
serious consequences for the individual’s capability to either provide or
respond to emotional cues in an appropriate way. This, in turn, impairs
the capability to interact with other people effectively and smoothly.
Likewise, social interactions with robots may be difficult if the robotic
counterpart is unable to express and interpret emotional states.
118 Emotion
8.4 Emotions for robots

Emotions are considered an important communication channel in HRI.
When a robot expresses emotion, people tend to ascribe a level of so-
cial agency to it (Breazeal, 2004a; Novikova and Watts, 2015). Even if
a robot has not explicitly been designed to express emotions, users may
still interpret the robot’s behavior as if it had been motivated by emo-
tional states. A robot that is not programmed to share, understand, or
express emotions will thus run into problems when people interpret its
behavior as disinterested, cold, or plain rude. Therefore, engineers and
designers should consider what emotions the robot’s design and behav-
ior convey, whether and how a robot will interpret emotional input,
and how it will respond.
8.4.1 Emotion interaction strategies

The most straightforward way of programming emotional responsive-
ness for social robots may be through mimicry. Mimicking in humans
has been shown to create an idea of shared reality: you indicate that
you fully understand the other person’s situation, which creates close-
ness (Stel et al., 2008). The exception here might be anger—however
good it may feel at first, responding to an angry person by yelling back
usually does not facilitate mutual understanding or a resolution of the
conflict.
A robot can use mimicry as a simple interaction strategy. It is a
relatively simple response because it requires the robot “only” to be
capable of recognizing an emotion in the human and then reflecting
the emotion back in response. This already poses plenty of challenges,
as will be discussed later in this chapter, but at least it cuts out the
complicated task of formulating an appropriate response. Moreover, it
may be a very basic expectation that humans have toward their inter-
action partners. Although we may excuse our friends for not knowing
how to cheer us up when we are sad, we do expect (and appreciate)
that they will respond to our sadness by lowering their brows and heads
and becoming more soft-spoken.
One note that has to be made here concerns expectation manage-
ment. When users perceive the robot to be emotionally responsive,
they may extend this observation to expectations about the robot’s
compliance with other social norms. For example, a user may expect
a robot to remember to ask about a confrontational meeting he was
upset about the other night, so when the robot simply wishes him to
“have a great day at work!” in the morning, he may be disappointed
in the robot’s social skills. Thus, the robot’s emotional responsiveness
should match its capability to fulfill other expectations.
8.4 Emotions for robots 119
8.4.2 Artificial perception of emotions

Robots need to register a wide variety of emotional cues, some explicit
and some subtle, before being capable of emotional interaction. For
instance, if we want to create a robot that responds emotionally when
someone displays aggressive behavior, such as throwing an item at it,
we need to integrate technologies for human behavior recognition and
object recognition.
More specifically, we may want to create a robot that responds to
human emotions. There are many studies on affect recognition (Gunes
et al., 2011; Zeng et al., 2009). The most typical approach to recogniz-
ing or classifying emotions is to use computer vision to extract emotions
from facial cues. Provided with a data set of human (frontal) faces with
correctly labeled emotions, machine-learning systems, such as those us-
ing deep-learning techniques (LeCun et al., 2015), can extract features
from the image to recognize a range of facial emotions. A famous exam-
ple of this is smile recognition, which is broadly implemented in digital
cameras nowadays. Affect recognition may also imply the interpreta-
tion of other visual cues, such as walking patterns, alleviating the need
for a clear view of the user’s face (Venture et al., 2014).
Many consumer-market digital cameras have a smile-detection fea-

ture. If a group poses in front of the camera, it will only take a
shot when all the people in the frame smile. This technology partly
replaces the timer function, which could never guarantee that ev-
erybody would look at the camera and smile at the time of the
picture being taken.
Next to visual cues, human speech is perhaps the second most im-
portant channel to extract emotion from. In particular, prosody, the
patterns of stress and intonation in spoken language, can be used to
read the emotional state of the speaker. For instance, when people are
happy, they tend to talk with a higher pitch. When sad, they tend
to speak slowly and with a lower pitch. Researchers have developed
pattern-recognition techniques (i.e., machine learning) to infer human
emotions from speech (El Ayadi et al., 2011; Han et al., 2014).
Finally, a robot can sense human affect from other modalities. For in-
stance, human skin conductance changes in response to an individual’s
affective state. A prominent example of the use of skin conductance as
a measure is the polygraph or lie detector. However, skin-conductance
sensors have been tried in HRI, with only limited success (Bethel et al.,
2007).
120 Emotion
Figure 8.1
Emotions
expressed through
mechanical facial
expressions. Left:
eMuu (2001).
Middle: iCat
(2005–2012).
Right: Flobi
(2010). (Source:
Christoph
Bartneck and
University of
Bielefeld)
8.4.3 Expressing emotions with robots

Typically, people design robots that convey emotions through facial
expressions. The most common approach here is to mimic the way in
which people display emotions. This is a good example of how the
study of human behaviors can be used for designing robot behaviors.
The facial expression of emotions has been well documented (Hjortsjö,
1969). Ekman’s Facial Action Coding System (FACS), in which human
facial muscles are grouped as action units (AUs), describes emotions
as combinations of action units (Ekman and Friesen, 1978). For in-
stance, when a person displays a happy face (i.e., smiling), the muscles
involved are the orbicularis oculi and pars orbitalis, which raise the
cheek (AU6), and the zygomaticus major, which raises the corners of
the mouth (AU12).
Using a simplified equivalent of human facial muscles, researchers
have developed robots that are capable of conveying emotions through
facial expressions. For instance, a robotic face with soft rubber skin
and 19 pneumatic actuators was developed by Hashimoto et al. (2013).
This robot uses AUs to express facial emotions. For example, it acti-
vates actuators corresponding to AU6 and A12 to express happiness.
There are many other robots designed to express emotion that rely
on a simplified interpretation of human facial cues, including Kismet
(Breazeal and Scassellati, 1999), Eddie (Sosnowski et al., 2006), iCat
(van Breemen et al., 2005), and eMuu (Bartneck, 2002), among others
(see Figure 8.1).
Robots can also express emotion through various humanlike modal-
ities, such as body movements and prosody. But even nonanthropo-
morphic robots can express affect, by means of adjusting their naviga-
tional trajectories. For instance, research on a cleaning robot (Saerbeck
and Bartneck, 2010) and a flying robot (Sharma et al., 2013) showed
8.4 Emotions for robots 121

Figure 8.2 Non-
anthropomorphic
robots can express
emotion through
their behavior or
through the
addition of
expressive features,
such as lights.
Anki, the producer
of Cozmo
(2016–2019),
describes its robot
as “[having] his
own lively
that they could display affect through adapting particular motion pat- personality, driven
terns. Some other ways in which nonanthropomorphic robots can ex- by powerful AI,
press affect include speed of motion, body posture, sound, color, and and brought to life
with complex facial
orientation (see Figure 8.2) to the person they are interacting with
expressions, a host
(Bethel and Murphy, 2008). of emotions and
his own emotive
language and
8.4.4 Emotion models soundtrack.”
(Source: Anki)
Psychologists (Plutchik and Conte, 1997; Scherer, 1984) have attempted
to capture human emotions in formal models. The benefit of this ap-
proach is that it views emotions as a numerical representation, which
in turn lends itself well to representing emotion in computers and ro-
bots. These models also put different emotional categories in relation
to each other, for example, by defining happiness as the polar opposite
of sadness or by defining a distance function between emotions.
Emotion models are not only used to capture the emotional state of
the user but can also be used to represent the emotional state of the
robot itself and subsequently drive the behavior of the robot. For exam-
ple, a robot with an almost-empty battery can act tired and announce
it needs a rest. Once it has reached the charger, it needs to update its
internal emotional state to happy. Expressing this emotional state al-
lows the user to have access to the robot’s internal state and will enrich
the interaction.
A classic emotion model that has been used in some robots is the
OCC model, named after its authors’ initials (Ortony et al., 1988). This
model specifies 22 emotion categories based on valenced reactions to
situations, such as events and acts of agents (including oneself), or as
reactions to attractive or unattractive objects (see Figure 8.3). It also
offers a structure for the variables, such as the likelihood of an event
or the familiarity of an object, which determines the intensity of the
emotion types. It contains a sufficient level of complexity and detail to
cover most situations an emotional robot might have to deal with.
Needless to say, many robots do not possess the ability to express
all 22 emotions. Even if they could, implementing 22 different emo-
122 Emotion
Figure 8.3 The
OCC model of
Valenced reactions to
emotions.
Consequences Actions of Aspects of

of events Agents Objects
Goals praise- appealing- Attitudes

desirability
pleased worthiness ness
approving
displeased
disapproving
etc.
Standards
Focusing on Focusing on
liking
disliking Legend
Consequences Consequences etc.
Self Agent Other Agent
for other for self
Desirable Undesirable Prospect Prospect pride admiration

for other for other relevant irrelevant shame reproach Intensity Variable
Attribution
happy-for gloating joy
resentment pity hope distress
fear
Fortunes of others Well-Being joy
distress
Attraction OCC Emotional State
Confirmed Disconfirmed gratification gratitude
remorse anger
satisfaction relief Well-Being/Attribution compounds

fear-confirmed disappointment
Prospect-Based Knowledge
tions can be challenging; hence, many robot designers prefer to reduce

the number of categories. Often, a decision is made to implement only
Ekman’s six basic facial emotional expressions. These are reliably rec-
ognized, even across cultures Ekman (1992). However, a robot that only
expresses six emotions makes for a quite limited interaction experience.
Perhaps more popular than the OCC model are the models that re-
present emotion as a point in a multidimensional space. Russel’s two-
dimensional (2D) space of arousal and valence (see Figure 8.4) captures
a wide range of emotions on a 2D plane and is one of the simplest emo-
tion models that still has sufficient expressive power for HRI (Russell,
1980).
The 2D circumplex model, however, places “angry” and “afraid” side
by side, whereas most people would argue that these are vastly differ-
ent emotions. Later versions thus added a third axis, leading to the
framework by Mehrabian and Russell (1974); Mehrabian (1980). This
framework captures emotions in a three-dimensional (3D), continuous
space, with the dimensions consisting of pleasure (P), arousal (A), and
dominance (D) (see Figure 8.5). The PAD space model has been used
on many social robots to model the user’s and the robot’s emotional
state, including Kismet (Breazeal, 2003).
8.5 Challenges in affective HRI

Despite considerable efforts in the perception, representation, and ex-
pression of emotion in virtual agents and robots, there are still a number
of open challenges.
It is virtually impossible to correctly read emotions from facial in-
8.5 Challenges in affective HRI 123

Figure 8.4
EXCITED
ALARMED AROUSED Russel’s
ASTONISHED
circumplex model
Arousal
of affect.
AFRAID
DELIGHTED
TENSE ANGRY
DISTRESSED
ANNOYED
GLAD
FRUSTRATED HAPPY
PLEASED
Valence
SATISFIED
CONTENT
MISERABLE SERENE
CALM
DEPRESSED
AT EASE
SAD RELAXED
GLOOMY
BORED
DROOPY
TIRED SLEEPY
Figure 8.5 The

A
PAD emotion
model. An emotion
is represented as a
point in a 3D
space, with axes
representing
pleasure (P),
dominance (D),
and arousal (A).
D P
formation alone (see Figure 8.6). Given that people struggle to cor-
rectly read emotions from still facial images, robots will certainly have
trouble with this as well. The addition of more information—such as
124 Emotion
Figure 8.6 Can the context of the interaction, animated rather than still expressions
you tell if the of emotion, and body language—allows us to increase the recognition
tennis player just
rate, both by people and by algorithms.
scored or lost a
point? A study Another problem in emotion recognition by computers is that al-
showed that people most all algorithms are trained on emotions that have been acted out
struggled to by actors. As such, these emotions are exaggerated and bear little re-
correctly read
semblance to the emotions we experience and express in daily life. This
strong emotions
from the static also means that most emotion-recognition software is only able to cor-
faces alone, but rectly recognize emotions that are displayed with a certain exaggerated
they could, intensity. Because of this, their use in real-world applications is still
however, when limited (Pantic et al., 2007), and the recognition accuracy of subtle
only seeing the
body posture
emotional expressions drops dramatically (Bartneck and Reichenbach,
(Aviezer et al., 2005). Another problem is that most emotion-recognition software re-
2012). (Source: turns probabilities for only the six basic emotions proposed by Ekman,
Steven Pisano) or a point in a 2D or 3D emotion space. This is perhaps a rather limited
view of emotion and misses many of the emotions we experience in real
life, such as pride, embarrassment, guilt, or annoyance.
Another aspect of emotional recognition that poses difficulty for ro-
bots is recognizing emotions across a wide variety of people. Although
we may all be expressing a number of universal emotions, we do not all
do it with the same intensity, in the same type of context, or with the
same meaning. Interpreting the emotional status of a person, therefore,
requires a sensitivity to his or her individual affective quirks. Humans
become adept at this through long years of interacting with each other
but also through long-term experience with individuals. That is why
you might be able to tell that your partner is laughing out of annoy-
ance rather than happiness, whereas new acquaintances may not be
able to do so. Robots still decode emotions largely based on momen-
tary snapshots of a person’s countenance, and they do not develop
more long-term models of affect, emotion, and mood for their interact-
ion partners.
Finally, a robot’s emotional responsiveness can fool potential end
users into thinking the robot would actually experience genuine emo-
tions. A robot merely expressing a certain emotion does not replace
the actual, visceral experience of an emotional state. The robot merely
displays emotional states in response to a computational model. Af-
fective cognition, in which a full socioemotional repertoire is expressed
and recognized for different users and contexts, still remains elusive.
Questions for you to think about:
• Come up with a list of 10 emotions, and then try to display them
nonverbally to a friend. Can your friend guess which emotion you
are showing?
8.5 Challenges in affective HRI 125
• Let’s role play: To understand how emotions are involved in our

daily interaction, imagine being incapable of both experiencing
and processing any information involving emotion. Then, set out
to have a chat with a friend (consider telling the friend before-
hand about your experiment). Try not to respond to whatever
emotion your talking partner displays, and try not to show any
emotional feedback. What happens?
• Are there tasks for which a robot should or shouldn’t have emo-
tion? Is it a good idea to implement emotion into a self-driving
car, for example? If not, what are the potential problems?
Future reading:
• Christoph Bartneck and Michael J. Lyons. Facial expression
analysis, modeling and synthesis: Overcoming the limita-
tions of artificial intelligence with the art of the soluble.
In Jordi Vallverdu and David Casacuberta, editors, Hand-
book of research on synthetic emotions and sociable robotics:
New applications in affective computing and artificial in-
telligence, Information Science Reference, pages 33–53. IGI
Global, 2009. URL http://www.bartneck.de/publications/
2009/facialExpressionAnalysisModelingSynthesisAI/
bartneckLyonsEmotionBook2009.pdf
• Cynthia Breazeal. Social interactions in HRI: The robot view.
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part
C (Applications and Reviews), 34(2):181–186, 2004b. doi: 10.
1109/TSMCC.2004.826268. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/
TSMCC.2004.826268
• Rafael A. Calvo, Sidney D’Mello, Jonathan Gratch, and Arvid
Kappas. The Oxford handbook of affective computing. Oxford
Library of Psychology, Oxford, UK, 2015. ISBN 978-0199942237.
URL http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1008985555
• R. W. Picard. Affective computing. MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA, 1997. ISBN 978-0262661157. URL https://mitpress.
mit.edu/books/affective-computing
• Robert Trappl, Paolo Petta, and Sabine Payr. Emotions in hu-
mans and artifacts. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2003. ISBN
978-0262201421. URL https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/
emotions-humans-and-artifacts

Human Robot Interaction An Introduction 08 Emotion

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human Robot Interaction An Introduction 08 Emotion

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

© copyright by Christoph Bartneck, Tony Belpaeime, Friederike Eyssel, Takayuki Kanda, Merel Keijsers, and Selma Sabanovic 2019.

What is covered in this chapter:

8.1 What are emotions, mood, and affect?

8.1 What are emotions, mood, and affect? 115

signals to the other person that he or she crossed a line. Conversely,

8.1.1 Emotion and interaction

and minimizes the chances of social rejection and interpersonal physical

8.2 Understanding human emotions

8.3 When emotions go wrong 117

of the regions, suggesting that assumptions about the nature of some

8.3 When emotions go wrong

8.4 Emotions for robots

8.4.1 Emotion interaction strategies

8.4 Emotions for robots 119

8.4.2 Artificial perception of emotions

Many consumer-market digital cameras have a smile-detection fea-

8.4.3 Expressing emotions with robots

8.4 Emotions for robots 121

Consequences Actions of Aspects of

Goals praise- appealing- Attitudes

Desirable Undesirable Prospect Prospect pride admiration

satisfaction relief Well-Being/Attribution compounds

tions can be challenging; hence, many robot designers prefer to reduce

8.5 Challenges in affective HRI

8.5 Challenges in affective HRI 123

Figure 8.5 The

8.5 Challenges in affective HRI 125

• Let’s role play: To understand how emotions are involved in our

You might also like