Functional/Semantic Gesture Design Factor Studies on Social Robot for User Experience Design
AUTHORS
Seung Eun Chung,Dept. of Content Convergence, Ewha Womans University, 52, Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03760, Korea
Han Young Ryoo*,Dept. of Content Convergence, Ewha Womans University, 52, Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03760, Korea
ABSTRACT
It is necessary to classify the design factors for the user experience design at a level that causes a difference in the aspect of the user experience. So in this research, the functional/semantic gesture design factors have been derived through case studies and a survey where they were amended to have the level values with which a significant difference was verified in the user experience. The organized functional/semantic gesture design factors from the research are the gestures for concept instruction, behavior description, behavior mimic, and functional performance. The concept instruction attribute has been suggested as ‘item’s sequential/quantity instructions’, and ‘directional instructions’. The behavior description attribute has been reorganized to ‘usage/situational behavior description’, and ‘symbolic behavior description’. The behavior mimic attribute has been proposed and remained as ‘prototype behavior mimic’, ‘biological behavior mimic’, ‘personality behavior mimic’. Lastly, the functional performance attribute has been presented as ‘direct behavior performance’ and ‘proxy behavior performance.
KEYWORDS
Social service robot, Gesture design factors, Functional/Semantic gesture
REFERENCES
[1] V. I. Pavlovic, R. Sharma, and T. S. Huang, “Visual interpretation of hand gestures for human-computer interaction: A review,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis & Machine Intelligence, vol.19, no.7, pp.677-695, (1997) DOI: 0.1109/34.598226
[2] M. Karam and M. C. Schraefel, “A taxonomy of gestures in human computer interactions,” Technical Report ECSTR IAM 05-009, Electronics and computer science, university of Southampton, (2005)
[3] J. Choi, T. Kanda, and M. Kim, “Motion design guideline for a humanoid robot,” KSDS Conference Proceeding, Korean Society of Design Science, May, (2009)
[4] George Marcus Lloyde and Tomar Geetam Singh, “Comparative Review of Floating-Point Multiplier Systems,” International Journal of Hybrid Information Technology, vol.12, no.2, pp.21-48, (2019) DOI:10.21742/IJHIT.2019.12.2.04(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[5] S. E. Chung and H. Y. Ryoo, “Social Robot’s appearance interface design factor research,” International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Applications for Smart Devices, vol.5, no.2, (2017)
[6] J.J. Garret, “The elements of user experience,” New Riders, (2003)
[7] K. Battarbee, “Co-experience: Understanding user experiences in social interaction,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Artand Design Helsinki, (2004)
[8] W. H. Lee, J. W. Park, W. H. Kim, H. S. Lee, and M. J. Chung, “Robot’s motivational emotion model with value effectiveness for social human and robot interaction,” Journal of Institute of Control, Robotics and Systems, vol.20, no.5, (2014) DOI: 10.5302/J.ICROS.2014.14.9028(CrossRef)(Google Scholar)
[9] J. Jung, T. Kanda, and M. Kim., “Motion design guideline for a humanoid robot,” KSDS conference proceeding, Korean Society of Design Science, May, (2009)