DETERMINACIÓN DE COLOR

By looking at the observations it is ex- pected that children have expectations about the robot’s emotions. Some chil- dren mentioned their reason to select an action upfront. As an example, in

trial E1 selected the food to ensure

the robot would not die. In trial E4 children selected the rocket to ensure

78

the robot could fly. In these trials, the children probably expected the robot to react positively, since the actions prevented something “bad”.

No matter if the actual robot emotion matched the emotion they expected, many children just took the actual emo- tion for granted. They mostly split the emotions in either positive or negative and reacted accordingly. Some repeat- ed what the robot said [trial E5, E6], whereas others explicitly mentioned how they thought the robot felt [trial

E5, E6]. Other children specifically

indicated that the actual emotion did not fit with the emotion they expected. They tried to come up with a reason for the actual emotion. As an example, in trial E5 children suggested that the robot wanted to talk to another figure when showing a negative emotion when seeing a figure. Their sugges- tion indicates they probably expected the robot to be happy. These children sometimes also indicated they did not expect a certain robot emotion (“Sad, but why?”), but simply accepted it. Children often confirmed it when the actual emotion met the emotion they expected. They mentioned things, such as: “That is what you want” [trial E8], “Yes, he said yes. Okay, this is good, this is good. He needs the friend as a space man” [trial E5] and “Okay, this figure is in your team” [trial E8]. Inter- esting to note is that the robot showed a positive emotion (happy or surprise) in all these examples.

What can also be seen from the ob- servations is that the children did not often reused items. They mainly se- lected unused items [trial E2, E3, E5,

E6, E7]. The children probably wanted

to explore the robot responses on all items individually. Other reasons why children did not reuse items were too limited time due too reading difficul- ties [trial E6] and not reusing items

when the robot reacted negatively the first time [trial E7]. When children did reuse an item, it seemed they did not notice that the emotion was different

[trial E1, E2, E6, E7] or did recognise

a different emotion, but just took it for granted [trial E3, E6]. For example, children responded by “but he did not have such a happy face”, referring to the robot being happy the first time [trial

E3] and “then he was afraid” referring

to the robot being afraid the first time

[trial E6]. In trial E5 children used the

dog independent from robot's emotion more often, they probably just liked the dog. In just one trial the children ac- tually wondered why the robot showed a different emotion than before [trial

E4]. They tried to seek for a reason and

provided the robot with other items to see how this influenced its emotion. In trial E7 the robot was afraid the first time a child selected the present. When the other child then selected the present, the robot turned happy. This resulted in the first child being indig- nant and upset, since the robot was not happy when he selected the present.

Other Remarks

Many children greeted the robot by talking to it [trial NE3, NE4, NE8,

E3, E7] or waving at it [trial NE2, NE3]. Some children talked to the

robot during play [trial E5] or repeat- ed the sounds he made [trial E5, E6]. Also, some children stroked the robot

[trial NE4, E8]. These observations in-

dicate the children perceived the robot as a character.

Children often expected the "go to" ac- tion could be selected to send the robot to the moon [trial NE1, NE6, NE7,

E1]. After the researcher explained this

was not possible yet, they sometimes came up with reasons why the robot was not able to go to moon yet [trial

NE1, E1]. One child did not under-

stand and asked: “How do you have to

go to the moon actually?” [trial E4]. In one trial [NE6] children thought the action "goes to" meant the robot used a map, since the icon of the action was a map. A similar situation occurred in trial NE8 in which the children also thought the robot would use the object of the icon when pressing the corre- sponding action button. Something else which was observed more often is children reacting to the tablet with the robot's thought bubble after an action. Children often reacted in a similar way to "he saw him" [trial NE1, NE3, NE7,

NE8, E1, E3], indicating the robot rec-

ognised what was in front of it. In many trials some story content was present. Children included causality by describing reasons for the occurrence of actions or emotions. Children men- tioned arguments, such as: he wants to make more friends [trial NE4], he should wear its suit [trial NE3, NE5], he needs food, otherwise he dies [trial

E3] and he needs a rocket to go to the

moon [trial E3, E4, E5].

In some trials children explicitly said they liked the activity [trial NE4, NE7,

E5]. However, one child continuously

asked when they could play with the robot, whereas the other child seemed to like telling the story already [trial

NE3]. Again this was a boy, which is

in line with previous results.

Finally, a last remark. Only in trial E8 the children actively looked at the sto- ryline. In this trial the children were reminded by the fact that they already used the dog many times.

79