journal article·2021-09-25Open access

Leader–Follower Role Allocation for Physical Collaboration in Human Dyads

Rebeka Kropivšek Leskovar, Jernej Čamernik, Tadej Petrič

Applied Sciences· Volume 11· Issue 19

Abstract

People often find themselves in situations where collaboration with others is necessary to accomplish a particular task. In such cases, a leader–follower relationship is established to coordinate a plan to achieve a common goal. This is usually accomplished through verbal communication. However, what happens when verbal communication is not possible? In this study, we observe the dynamics of a leader–follower relationship in human dyads during collaborative tasks where there is no verbal communication between partners. Using two robotic arms, we designed a collaborative experimental task in which subjects perform the task individually or coupled together through a virtual model. The results show that human partners fall into the leader–follower dynamics even when they cannot communicate verbally. We demonstrate this in two steps. First, we study how each subject in a collaboration influences task performance, and second, we evaluate whether both partners influence it equally or not using our proposed sorting method to objectively identify a leader. We also study the leader–follower dynamics by analysing the task performance of partners during their individual sessions to predict the role distribution in a dyad. Based on the results of our prediction method, we conclude that the higher-performing individual performance will assume the role of a leader in collaboration.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Action Observation and Synchronization · Motor Control and Adaptation · Tactile and Sensory Interactions

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Jožef Stefan International Postgraduate School, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Applied Cognitive Psychology, Faculty for Computer Science, Engineering, and Psychology, Ulm University, 89081 Ulm, Germany

Funding

Slovenian Research Agency

References (35)

Show source-provided references
1. Optimally Interacting Minds10.1126/science.1185718 ↗
2. Understanding the Dynamics of Leadership: The Role of Follower Self-Concepts in the Leader/Follower Relationship10.1006/obhd.1999.2832 ↗
3. Enhancing the efectiveness of work groups and teams10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x ↗
4. Joint action: Bodies and minds moving together10.1016/j.tics.2005.12.009 ↗
5. Physically interacting individuals estimate the partner’s goal to enhance their movements10.1038/s41562-017-0054 ↗
6. Takagi, A., Usai, F., Ganesh, G., Sanguineti, V., and Burdet, E. (2018). Haptic communication between humans is tuned by the hard or soft mechanics of interaction. PLoS Comput. Biol., 14.10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005971 ↗
7. Individuals physically interacting in a group rapidly coordinate their movement by estimating the collective goal10.7554/eLife.41328 ↗
8. Batson, J.P., Kato, Y., Shuster, K., Patton, J.L., Reed, K.B., Tsuji, T., and Novak, D. (2020, January 20–24). Haptic Coupling in Dyads Improves Motor Learning in a Simple Force Field. Proceedings of the 2020 42nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine Biology Society (EMBC), Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/EMBC44109.2020.9176261 ↗
9. Che, Y., Haro, G.M., and Okamura, A.M. (2016, January 26–29). Two is not always better than one: Effects of teleoperation and haptic coupling. Proceedings of the 2016 6th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob), Singapore.10.1109/BIOROB.2016.7523809 ↗
10. Beckers, N., Keemink, A., van Asseldonk, E., and Kooij, H. (2018). Haptic Human-Human Interaction Through a Compliant Connection Does Not Improve Motor Learning in a Force Field, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-93445-7_29 ↗
11. Haptically linked dyads: Are two motor-control systems better than one?10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01712.x ↗
12. Physical collaboration of human-human and human-robot teams10.1109/TOH.2008.13 ↗
13. Let the force be with us: Dyads exploit haptic coupling for coordination10.1037/a0022337 ↗
14. Stefanov, N., Peer, A., and Buss, M. (2009, January 18–20). Role determination in human-human interaction. Proceedings of the World Haptics 2009—Third Joint EuroHaptics conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.10.1109/WHC.2009.4810846 ↗
15. Takagi, A., Beckers, N., and Burdet, E. (2016). Motion Plan Changes Predictably in Dyadic Reaching. PLoS ONE, 11.10.1371/journal.pone.0167314 ↗
16. Groten, R., Feth, D., Goshy, H., Peer, A., Kenny, D.A., and Buss, M. (October, January 27). Experimental analysis of dominance in haptic collaboration. Proceedings of the RO-MAN 2009—The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Toyama, Japan.10.1109/ROMAN.2009.5326315 ↗
17. Sheybani, S., Izquierdo, E.J., and Roth, E. (2020, January 28–31). Evolving Dyadic Strategies for a Cooperative Physical Task. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS), Crystal City, VA, USA.10.1109/HAPTICS45997.2020.ras.HAP20.26.5d3bec79 ↗
18. Two is better than one: Physical interactions improve motor performance in humans10.1038/srep03824 ↗
19. Kropivšek Leskovar, R., Čamernik, J., and Petrič, T. (2020). Dyadic Human-Human Interactions in Reaching Tasks: Fitts’ Law for Two. Advances in Service and Industrial Robotics, Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-48989-2_22 ↗
20. The Information Capacity of the Human Motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement10.1037/h0055392 ↗
21. Speed–accuracy tradeoff in Fitts’ law tasks—On the equivalency of actual and nominal pointing precision10.1016/j.ijhcs.2004.09.007 ↗
22. Fitts’ Law as a Research and Design Tool in Human-Computer Interaction10.1207/s15327051hci0701_3 ↗
23. Intention Recognition for Dynamic Role Exchange in Haptic Collaboration10.1109/TOH.2012.21 ↗
24. The role of roles: Physical cooperation between humans and robots10.1177/0278364912455366 ↗
25. A Model for Human—Human Collaborative Object Manipulation and Its Application to Human—Robot Interaction10.1109/TRO.2016.2572698 ↗
26. For Motion Assistance Humans Prefer to Rely on a Robot Rather Than on an Unpredictable Human10.1109/OJEMB.2020.2987885 ↗
27. Petrič, T., Goljat, R., and Babič, J. (2016, January 15–17). Cooperative human-robot control based on Fitts’ law. Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE-RAS 16th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Cancun, Mexico.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2016.7803299 ↗
28. Control of bidirectional physical human—Robot interaction based on the human intention10.1007/s11370-016-0207-4 ↗
29. Petrič, T., Cevzar, M., and Babič, J. (2017, January 15–17). Utilizing speed-accuracy trade-off models for human-robot coadaptation during cooperative groove fitting task. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE-RAS 17th International Conference on Humanoid Robotics (Humanoids), Birmingham, UK.10.1109/HUMANOIDS.2017.8239544 ↗
30. A Dynamical System Approach to Task-Adaptation in Physical Human-Robot Interaction10.1007/s10514-018-9764-z ↗
31. Improving Tracking through Human-Robot Sensory Augmentation10.1109/LRA.2020.2998715 ↗
32. Slaves no longer: Review on role assignment for human—Robot joint motor action10.1177/1059712313481044 ↗
33. Synchrony and Reciprocity: Key Mechanisms for Social Companion Robots in Therapy and Care10.1007/s12369-015-0325-8 ↗
34. Kager, S., Hussain, A., Cherpin, A., Melendez-Calderon, A., Takagi, A., Endo, S., Burdet, E., Hirche, S., Ang, M.H., and Campolo, D. (2019, January 24–28). The effect of skill level matching in dyadic interaction on learning of a tracing task. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 16th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), Toronto, ON, Canada.10.1109/ICORR.2019.8779485 ↗
35. Skill Learning and Skill Transfer Mediated by Cooperative Haptic Interaction10.1109/TNSRE.2017.2700839 ↗