HRI as a Phenomenon of Social Interaction

Objective. Development of general theoretical and methodological concepts for the analysis of the interaction "human-robot" as a holistic human-technological gestalt; introduction into scientific circulation of the concept of human-technological reality; the formulation of the author's definition of personal space as a methodological basis for the study of human-technological relations.
Background. The creation of high-tech computer cognitive agents and humanoid robots are becoming a priority subject of scientific research in various fields of knowledge. The main difficulty in moving towards any single generally valid results lies in the fact that in each discipline the problem is investigated within the framework of its inherent terminology. The multivariance of interpretations of studies of human-social robot interaction is especially observed between representatives of the humanities, specialists in the field of artificial intelligence and engineering programming. There is a need for a systematic elaboration of the conceptual and categorical apparatus used to describe the phenomena of human-technological reality, in which a person coexists with new technological beings, is called upon to establish a certain level of relations with them, redistribute personal space, and form new models of social interaction.
Methodology. Convergent approach, system analysis, principle of integrity, typology of relations "I-Thou" by S.L. Frank.
Conclusions. Consideration of the typology of I-Thou relations, the author's definition of personal space, the introduction into scientific circulation of the concept of human-technological reality, highlighting the features of human-technological relations are proposed for use as a conceptual and methodological toolkit for researching human-robot interaction as a phenomenon of social interaction.

1. Akimova A.Yu. Tipologiya doveriya i nedoveriya cheloveka tekhnike [The typology of human trust and distrust of technics] [Electronic resource]. Internet-zhurnal «Mir nauki» = Online magazine "World of Science", 2018. Vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1– URL: https://mir-nauki.com/issue-2-2018.htm (Accessed 12.01.2021). (In Russ.).
2. Vil'chek F. Skrytye urovni [Hidden Levels]. In Brokman J. (ed). Eta kniga sdelaet vas umnee. Novye nauchnye kontseptsii effektivnosti myshleniya [This book will make you smarter. New scientific concepts to improve your thinking]. Moscow: AST, 2016, pp. 269–273. (In Russ.).
3. Zhdanova S.Yu., Puzyreva L.O., Seredkina E.V. Osobennosti vospriyatiya robota chelovekom[Features of human perception of the robot]. In Kolodiy N.A. (ed). Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii “Budushchee umnykh golov v Evrope i Srednei Azii: problemy i perspektivy” (g. Tomsk, 6-8 iyunya 2021 g.) [Proceedings of the international scientific and practical conference “The future of smart heads in Europe and Central Asia: problems and prospects”]. Tomsk: TPU, 2021, pp. 32–34. (In Russ.).
4. Mironova A. Ispol'zovanie informatsionno-kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologii i sotsial'nyi kapital: priroda vzaimosvyazi [The use of information and communication technologies and social capital: the nature of interconnection]. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2022. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 5–21. DOI:10.17759/sps.202213010 (In Russ.).
5. Motorina L.E., Sytnik V.M. Fundamental'nye otnosheniya cheloveka k miru [Fundamental human relations to the world]. Voprosy filosofii = Questions of philosophy, 2017, no. 8, pp. 69–(In Russ.).
6. Motorina L.E., Chernyaeva G. Psikhologicheskaya virtual'naya real'nost' v komp'yuternoi interaktivnoi srede [Psychological virtual reality in an interactive computer environment]. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo = Social Psychology and Society, 2020. Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 8–26. DOI:10.17759/sps.2020110102. (In Russ.).
7. Seredkina E. Filosofskie osnovaniya prikladnogo antropomorfizma v sotsial'noi robototekhnike [Philosophical foundations of applied anthropomorphism in social robotics]. Tekhnologos = Technologos, 2020, no. 4, pp. 56–63. DOI:10.15593/perm.kipf/2020.4.05 (In Russ.).
8. Stolbova N.V., Seredkina E.V., Myshkin O. Naskol'ko «Zloveshchaya dolina» zloveshcha na samom dele? Opyt dekonstruktsii diskursa [How sinister is “Uncanny Valley” really? Experience of discourse deconstruction]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiy = Bulletin of the Perm University. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology, 2022, no. 1, pp. 91–107. DOI:10.17072/2078-7898/2022-1-91-107 (In Russ.).
9. Frank S.L. Nepostizhimoe [The Unfathomable]. Sochineniy [Oeuvre]. Moscow: Pravda, 363 p. (In Russ.).
10. Tsvyk V., Tsvyk I.V. Sotsial'nye problemy razvitiya i primeneniya iskusstvennogo intellekta [Social problems of development and application of artificial intelligence]. Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Sotsiologiya = RUDN Journal of Sociology, 2022. Vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 58–69. DOI:10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-1-58-69 (InRuss.).
11. Banks J. Of Like Mind: The (Mostly) Similar Mentalizing of Robots and Humans. Technology, Mind and Behavior, Vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–13. DOI:10.1037/tmb0000025
12. Banks M.R., Willoughby L.M., Banks W. Animal-assisted therapy and loneliness in nursing homes: use of robotic versus living dogs. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2008. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 173–177. DOI:10.1016/j.jamda.2007.11.007
13. Bargh J. The cognitive monster: The case against controllability of automatic stereotype effects. In Chaiken S., Trope Y. (eds.). Dual processes theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford, 1999, pp. 361–382.
14. Brinck I., Balkenius C. Mutual Recognition in Human-Robot Interaction: Deflationary Account. Philosophy and Technology, Vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 53–70. DOI:10.1007/s13347-018-0339-x
15. Chesher C., Andreallo F. Robotic Faciality: The Philosophy, Science and Art of Robot Faces. International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 83–96. DOI:10.1007/s12369-020-00623-2
16. Chesher C., Silvera-Tawil D. A Robot-Human Handshake in Space: Touch and Lively Alterity Relations in Social Robotics. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Vol. 335, pp. 86–95. DOI:10.3233/FAIA200903
17. Conti D., Cattani A., Nuovo C. et al. A cross-cultural study of acceptance and use of robotics by future psychology practitioners. 24th International Symposium IEEE on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). Japan: Kobe, August, 2015, pp. 555–560. DOI:10.1109/ROMAN.2015.7333601
18. Dautenhahn K. Socially Intelligent Robots: Dimensions of Human-Robot Interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences, Vol. 362, no. 1480, pp. 679–704. DOI:10.1098/rstb.2006.2004
19. Devine P.G. Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 5–18. DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.56.1.5
20. Eyssel F., Hegel F. et al. Activating elicited agent knowledge: How robot and user features shape the perception of social robot. IEEE RO-MAN 2012: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2012, pp. 851–857. DOI:10.1109/ROMAN.2012.6343858
21. Eyssel F. What's Social about Social Robots? A Psychological Perspective. HRI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. Japan: Sapporo Hokkaido (March 7–10), 2022, p. 2.
22. Feil-Seifer D., Mataric M. Socially Assistive Robotics. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, Vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 24–31. DOI:10.1109/MRA.2010.940150
23. Fiske S.T. Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Handbook of Social Psychology.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske et al. (eds). Vol. 1 and 2, 4th Edition, ch. 25. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998, pp. 357–411.
24. Forlizzi J. Robotic products to assist the aging population. Interactions, Vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 16–18. DOI:10.1145/1052438.1052454
25. Hall E.T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday and company, 217 p.
26. Hoffman G., Birnbaum G. et al. Robot Responsiveness to Human Disclosure Affects Social Impression and Appeal. 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human – Robot Interaction (HRI), Germany, Bielefeld, (3-6 March) 2014, pp. 513–516. DOI:1145/2559636.2559660
27. Hoffman G. What Makes Us Human? The future of human-robot interaction [Electronic resource]. Society and Culture, Listen on Apple Podcasts. 9/27/2017.URL: https:cornell.edu/news/future-human-robot-interaction (Accessed 02.04.2020).
28. Kahn P.H., Ishiguro H., Friedman B., Kanda T. et al. What is a Human? – Toward Psychological Benchmarks in the Field of Human-Robot Interaction. ROMAN 2006: 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 363–390. DOI:10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314461
29. Kerzel M., Pekarek-Rosin T., Strahl E., Heinrich S., Wermter S. Teaching NICO How to Grasp: An Empirical Study on Crossmodal Social Interaction as a Key Factor for Robots Learning from Humans. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, Vol. 14, no. 28, pp. 1–22. DOI:10.3389/fnbot.2020.00028
30. Ko S.J. et al. What the voice reveals: Within and between-category stereotyping on the basis of voice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 806–819. DOI:10.1177/0146167206286627
31. Krägeloh C.U. et al. Questionnaires to Measure Acceptability of Social Robots: A Critical Review. Robotics, Vol. 8, no. 4. 88 p. DOI:10.3390/robotics8040088
32. MacDorman K.F., Entezari S.O. Individual differences predict sensitivity to the uncanny valley. Interaction Studies, Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 141–172. DOI:10.1075/is.16.2.01mac
33. MacDorman K.F., Ho C.C. Measuring the Uncanny Valley Effect: Refinements to Indices for Perceived Humanness, Attractiveness, and Eeriness. International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 129–139. DOI:10.1007/s12369-016-0380-9
34. Martínez-Miranda J. et al. Age-based differences in preferences and affective reactions towards a robot's personality during interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 84, pp. 245–257. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.039
35. Meghdari1 A. et al. Arash: A social robot buddy to support children with cancer in a hospital environment. Journal of Engineering in Medicine, Vol. 232, no. 6, pp. 605–618. DOI:10.1177/0954411918777520
36. Motorina L.E., Sytnik V.M. Existential, Instrumental and Cyber Spaces as Ontological Modi of Human Being. Nova prisutnost, Vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 485–499. DOI:10.31192/np.18.3.4
37. Nagar S. Human-robot interactions: A psychological perspective. Nagar, Sandeep, 3/3/2016, pp. 1–12. DOI:13140/RG.2.1.2035.1763
38. Norbert H. et al. Empowering Workers in a Mixed Skills Concept for Collaborative Robot Systems [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fhvaheskloh696y/Submission_2.pdf?dl=0 (Accessed 19.02.2022).
39. Ost E., Reed D. Towards a Sociological Understanding of Robots as Companions. In Lamers M.H., Verbeek F.J. (eds). Human-Robot Personal Relationships. HRPR 2010. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, 2011. Vol. 59, pp. 11– Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-19385-9_2
40. Reis H. Steps toward the ripening of relationship science. Personal Relationships, 2007. Vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1–23. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2006.00139.x
41. Sciutti A., Rea F., Sandini G. When you are young, (robot’s) looks matter. Developmental changes in the desired properties of a robot friend [Electronic resource]. DOI:1109/ROMAN.2014.6926313 (Accessed 02.09.2020).
42. Stephanie L. et al. Circling Around the Uncanny Valley: Design Principles for Research into the Relation between Human Likeness and Eeriness. I-Perception, Vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1–11. DOI:10.1177/2041669516681309
43. Tapus A., Tapus C., Mataric M.J. The use of socially assistive robots in the design of intelligent cognitive therapies for people with dementia. IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (Japan, Kyoto, 23–26 June 2009), 2009, pp. 924–929. DOI:10.1109/ICORR.2009.5209501
44. Trovato G. et al. Investigating the effect of relative cultural distance on the acceptance of robots. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Social Robotics (France, Paris, 26–30 October 2015), 2015, pp. 664–673. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_66
45. Takayama L. Putting Human-Robot Interaction Research into Design Practice. HRI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Japan: Sapporo Hokkaido, March 7–10, 2022), 2022, pp. 1.