Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Jeremy Goslin

dblp:44/2166 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
2 papers
Human-robot interaction · 100%
Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Human-robot interaction › robot learning
social learning
0.412020
Do Humans Imitate Robots?: An Investigation of Strategic Social Learning in Human-Robot Interaction · HRI 2020
Human-robot interaction
anthropomorphism
0.212016
Priming Anthropomorphism: Can the credibility of humanlike robots be transferred to non-humanlike robots? · HRI 2016
Human-robot interaction
credibility
0.212016
Priming Anthropomorphism: Can the credibility of humanlike robots be transferred to non-humanlike robots? · HRI 2016
Human-robot interaction › nonverbal communication
social gaze
0.112016
Priming Anthropomorphism: Can the credibility of humanlike robots be transferred to non-humanlike robots? · HRI 2016

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

user study · 1.1statistical analysis · 0.9negotiation task · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Do Humans Imitate Robots?: An Investigation of Strategic Social Learning in Human-Robot Interaction
abstract
Theories on social learning indicate that imitative choices are usually performed whenever copying the others' behaviour has no additional cost. Here, we extended such investigations of social learning to Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). Participants played the Economic Investment Game with a robot banker while observing another robot player also investing in the robot banker. By manipulating the robot banker payoff, three conditions of unfairness were created: (1) unfair payoff for the participants, (2) unfair payoff for the robot player and (3) unfair payoff for both. Results showed that when the payoff was low for the participants and high for the robot player, participants invested more money in the robot banker than when both parties received a low return. Also, for this specific condition, participants' investments increased further with a more interactive robot player (defined as demonstrating increased attention, congruent movements and speech) This suggests that social and cognitive human competencies can be used and transposed to non-human agents. Further, imitation can potentially be extended to HRI, with interactivity likely having a key role in increasing this effect.
Debora Zanatto, Massimiliano Patacchiola, Jeremy Goslin, Serge Thill, Angelo Cangelosi
HRI3
2016 Priming Anthropomorphism: Can the credibility of humanlike robots be transferred to non-humanlike robots?
abstract
We investigated the perceived credibility of statements made by robots, hypothesising that people are more likely to believe robots with humanlike characteristics than those that are less anthropomorphic. We also examined whether prior experience with a humanlike robot would lead people to extend this advantage to the less-anthropomorphic robot. A measure of credibility was provided by agreement on the pricing of objects, where participants negotiated with either a more (iCub) or less-anthropomorphic robot (Scitos G5) that was engaged in more (using social gaze) or less-humanlike (fixed gaze) social behaviour. In the first experiment participants only interacted with Scitos G5, in the second they interacted with Scitos G5 only after having first interacted iCub. Results showed that iCub was more credible than Scitos G5, and was the only robot to benefit from the use of social gaze. It was also found that the credibility of the Scitos G5 was higher after participants were `primed' by prior exposure to the iCub.
Debora Zanatto, Massimiliano Patacchiola, Jeremy Goslin, Angelo Cangelosi
HRI3
2007 Collaboration in a multi-user game: impacts of an awareness tool on mutual modeling
Nicolas Nova, Thomas Wehrle, Jeremy Goslin, Yvan Bourquin, Pierre Dillenbourg
Multim. Tools Appl.3