CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 487

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

(S)he's Got the Look: Gender Stereotyping of Robots 1

EYSSEL, FRIEDERIKE, HEGEL, FRANK·2012·Journal of Applied Social Psychology
DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00937.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Previous research on gender effects in robots has largely ignored the role of facial cues. We fill this gap in the literature by experimentally investigating the effects of facial gender cues on stereotypical trait and application ascriptions to robots. As predicted, the short‐haired male robot was perceived as more agentic than was the long‐haired female robot, whereas the female robot was perceived as more communal than was the male counterpart. Analogously, stereotypically male tasks were perceived more suitable for the male robot, relative to the female robot, and vice versa. Taken together, our findings demonstrate that gender stereotypes, which typically bias social perceptions of humans, are even applied to robots. Implications for design‐related decisions are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00937.x

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 45

  1. 10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.768 · DOI
  2. Allport G. W., 1954, The nature of prejudice
  3. Bargh J. A., 1999, Dual‐process theories in social psychology, 361
  4. 10.1037/h0036215 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00018-1 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Brewer M. B., 1988, A dual‐process model of impression formation: Advances in social cognition, 1
  8. 10.1068/p220829 · DOI
  9. 10.1068/p220153 · DOI
  10. 10.1177/0013164497057001008 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0 · DOI
  12. DiSalvo C. F. Gemperle F. Forlizzi J. &Kiesler S.(2002 June 25–28).All robots are not created equal: The design and perception of humanoid robot heads.Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference London UK pp.321–326. · DOI
  13. 10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00374-3 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.2174/1874061800802010021 · DOI
  15. Eagly A. H., 1987, Sex differences in social behavior: A social‐role interpretation
  16. 10.1177/0146167289154008 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Eagly A. H., 2000, The developmental social psychology of gender, 123
  18. 10.1024/0044-3514.37.4.219 · DOI
  19. Fiske S. T., 1998, Handbook of social psychology, 357
  20. 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2 · DOI
  22. 10.1037/10277-008 · DOI
  23. Hegel F., 2010, Gestalterisch‐konstruktiver Entwurf eines sozialen Roboters [Design and conception of a social robot]
  24. Hegel F. Eyssel F. &Wrede B.(2010 September 12–15).The social robot FloBi: Key concepts of industrial design.Proceedings of the 19th IEEE International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO‐MAN 2010) Viareggio Italy pp.120–125.
  25. 10.1207/s15327051hci1901&2_7 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1207/s15327051hci1901&2_4 · DOI
  27. 10.1177/0146167206286627 · DOI
  28. 10.1371/journal.pone.0002597 · DOI
  29. Lee S.‐L. Kiesler S. Lau I. Y. &Chiu C. Y.(2005 April 18–22).Human mental models of humanoid robots. Proceedings of the 2005IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2005) Barcelona Spain pp.2767–2772.
  30. Lohse M., 2008, Domestic applications for social robots: A user study on appearance and function, Journal of Physical Agents, 2, 21
  31. 10.1002/ejsp.406 · DOI
  32. 10.1002/ejsp.445 · DOI
  33. 10.1521/soco.2006.24.5.540 · DOI
  34. Nass C., 1997, Human values and the design of computer technology, 137
  35. 10.1016/S0747-5632(98)00035-1 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00381-0 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Powers A. &Kiesler S.(2006 March 1–3).The advisor robot: Tracing people's mental model from a robot's physical attributes.Proceedings of the Conference on Human‐Robot Interaction (HRI 2006) Salt Lake City UT pp.218–225. · DOI
  38. Powers A. Kramer A. D. I. Lim S. Kuo J. Lee S‐L. &Kiesler S.(2005 August 14–15).Eliciting information from people with a gendered humanoid robot.Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (Ro‐Man 2005)Nashville TN pp.158–163. · DOI
  39. Reeves B., 1996, The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places
  40. Schneider‐Düker M., 1988, Die Erfassung von Geschlechtsrollen‐Ergebnisse zur deutschen Neukonstruktion des Bem Sex‐Role‐Inventory [The assessment of gender roles: Results of a German new construction of the Bem Sex‐Role Inventory], Diagnostica, 34, 256
  41. 10.7560/764439 · DOI
  42. Spence J. T., 1974, The Personal Attributes Questionnaire: A measure of sex‐role stereotypes and masculinity–femininity, JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 4, 43
  43. 10.1037/h0076857 · DOI
  44. 10.1126/science.1162548 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Zebrowitz L. A., 1997, Reading faces: Window to the soul?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
EYSSEL, F., & HEGEL, F.
Venue
Journal of Applied Social Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-07-27
Volume
42
Issue
9
Pages
2213-2230
ISSN
  • 0021-9029
  • 1559-1816
DOI
10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00937.x
Cited by
487
References
6
Language
en
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review