journal article·2025-08-06Open access

Are Robots More Engaging When They Respond to Joint Attention? Findings from a Turn-Taking Game with a Social Robot

Jesús García-Martínez, Juan José Gamboa-Montero, Álvaro Castro-González, José Carlos Castillo

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 15

Abstract

Joint attention, the capacity of two or more individuals to focus on a common event simultaneously, is fundamental to human–human interaction, enabling effective communication. When considering the field of social robotics, emulating this capability might be necessary for promoting natural interactions and thus improving user engagement. Responding to joint attention (RJA), defined as the ability to react to external attentional cues by aligning focus with another individual, plays a critical role in promoting mutual understanding. This study examines how RJA impacts user engagement during human–robot interaction. The participants play a turn-taking game against a social robot under two conditions: with our RJA system active and with the system inactive. Auditory and visual stimuli are introduced to simulate real-world dynamics, testing the robot’s ability to detect and follow the user’s focus of attention. We use a twofold approach to evaluate the system’s impact on the user’s experience during the interaction. On the one hand, we use head pose telemetry to quantify attentional aspects of engagement, including measures of distraction and focus during the interaction. On the other hand, we use a post-experimental questionnaire incorporating the User Engagement Scale Short Form to assess engagement. The results regarding telemetry data reveal reduced distraction and improved attentional consistency, highlighting the system’s ability to maintain attention on the current task effectively. Furthermore, the questionnaire responses show that RJA significantly enhances self-reported engagement when the system is active. We believe these findings confirm the value of attentional mechanisms in promoting engaging human–robot interactions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Social Robot Interaction and HRI · Face Recognition and Perception · Action Observation and Synchronization

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

Affiliations

Department of Systems Engineering and Automation, University Carlos III of Madrid, Av. de la Universidad, 30, 28911 Leganes, Madrid, Spain

Funding

Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI), Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación · European Union NextGeneration EU/PRTR · ERDF A way of making Europe

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. Picton, T.W., Campbell, K.B., Baribeau-Braun, J., and Proulx, G.B. (2022). The neurophysiology of human attention: A tutorial review. Attention and Performance VII, Routledge.10.4324/9781003310228-29 ↗
2. Burgoon, J.K., Manusov, V., and Guerrero, L.K. (2021). Nonverbal Communication, Routledge.10.4324/9781003095552 ↗
3. What We Do and Don’t Know About Joint Attention10.1007/s11245-023-09961-y ↗
4. Flom, R., Lee, K., and Muir, D. (2017). Gaze-Following: Its Development and Significance, Psychology Press.
5. Joint attention to mental content and the social origin of reasoning10.1007/s11229-019-02327-1 ↗
6. Moore, C., Dunham, P.J., and Dunham, P. (2014). Joint Attention: Its Origins and Role in Development, Psychology Press.10.4324/9781315806617 ↗
7. Huang, C.M., and Thomaz, A.L. (2010, January 11–13). Joint attention in human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2010 AAAI Fall Symposium Series, Arlington, VA, USA.
8. Mundy, P. (2021). RJA/IJA (Initiating/responding to joint attention). Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-91280-6_605 ↗
9. Cho, Y. (2015). The Relationship Between CJA, IJA, RJA of Joint Attention and Language in Infancy. [Ph.D. Thesis, Seoul National University Graduate School].
10. Intersubjectivity, joint action and sociality
11. Yuill, N., and Yuill, N. (2021). Engagement and Joint Attention. Technology to Support Children’s Collaborative Interactions: Close Encounters of the Shared Kind, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-75047-3 ↗
12. Human–cobot interaction fluency and cobot operators’ job performance. The mediating role of work engagement: A survey10.1016/j.robot.2022.104191 ↗
13. Break the ice: A survey on socially aware engagement for human–robot first encounters10.1007/s12369-020-00720-2 ↗
14. Social robots in education for long-term human-robot interaction: Socially supportive behaviour of robotic tutor for creating robo-tangible learning environment in a guided discovery learning interaction10.1149/10701.12389ecst ↗
15. Breazeal, C., Dautenhahn, K., and Kanda, T. (2016). Social robotics. Springer Handbook of Robotics, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1_72 ↗
16. Woertman, S.E. (2024). Joint Attention in Human-Robot Interaction. [Bachelor’s Thesis, University of Twente].
17. Social eye gaze in human-robot interaction: A review10.5898/JHRI.6.1.Admoni ↗
18. Application of Robots in Improving Joint Attention and Imitation Skills for Children with Autism: A Comprehensive Review
19. Turn-taking, feedback and joint attention in situated human–robot interaction10.1016/j.specom.2014.05.005 ↗
20. Implementation of a Biologically Inspired Responsive Joint Attention System for a Social Robot10.1002/aisy.202400650 ↗
21. García-Martínez, J., Gamboa-Montero, J.J., Castillo, J.C., and Castro-González, Á. (2024). Analyzing the Impact of Responding to Joint Attention on the User Perception of the Robot in Human-Robot Interaction. Biomimetics, 9.10.3390/biomimetics9120769 ↗
22. A practical approach to measuring user engagement with the refined user engagement scale (UES) and new UES short form10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.01.004 ↗
23. From the Definition to the Automatic Assessment of Engagement in Human–Robot Interaction: A Systematic Review10.1007/s12369-024-01146-w ↗
24. A constructive model for the development of joint attention10.1080/09540090310001655101 ↗
25. Boucenna, S., Gaussier, P., and Hafemeister, L. (2011, January 24–27). Development of joint attention and social referencing. Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL), Frankfurt am Main, Germany.10.1109/DEVLRN.2011.6037317 ↗
26. Scassellati, B. (1998, January 6–10). Imitation and mechanisms of joint attention: A developmental structure for building social skills on a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computation for Metaphors, Analogy, and Agents, University of Aizu, Aizuwakamatsu, Japan.10.1007/3-540-48834-0_11 ↗
27. Brooks, R.A., Breazeal, C., Marjanović, M., Scassellati, B., and Williamson, M.M. (1998, January 6–10). The Cog project: Building a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Computation for Metaphors, Analogy, and Agents, University of Aizu, Aizuwakamatsu, Japan.10.1007/3-540-48834-0_5 ↗
28. Ito, M., and Tani, J. (2004, January 20–22). Joint attention between a humanoid robot and users in imitation game. Proceedings of the International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL), La Jolla, CA, USA.
29. Ishida, T. (November, January 31). Development of a small biped entertainment robot QRIO. Proceedings of the Micro-Nanomechatronics and Human Science, and The Fourth Symposium Micro-Nanomechatronics for Information-Based Society, Nagoya, Japan.
30. Chew, J.Y., and Wang, X. (2024, January 11–15). Joint Attention Estimation during Multi-party Facilitation Using Multi-Modal Fusion. Proceedings of the Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Boulder, CO, USA. HRI ’24.10.1145/3610978.3640669 ↗
31. Huang, C.M., and Thomaz, A.L. (August, January 31). Effects of responding to, initiating and ensuring joint attention in human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2011 Ro-Man, Atlanta, GA, USA.10.1109/ROMAN.2011.6005230 ↗
32. Children use non-verbal cues to learn new words from robots as well as people
33. Improving social skills in children with ASD using a long-term, in-home social robot10.1126/scirobotics.aat7544 ↗
34. Pereira, A., Oertel, C., Fermoselle, L., Mendelson, J., and Gustafson, J. (2019, January 4–8). Responsive joint attention in human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Macau, China.10.1109/IROS40897.2019.8968130 ↗
35. Robot-assisted joint attention: A comparative study between children with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing children in interaction with NAO10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3044483 ↗
36. Mishra, C., and Skantze, G. (September, January 29). Knowing where to look: A planning-based architecture to automate the gaze behavior of social robots. Proceedings of the 2022 31st IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Napoli, Italy.10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900740 ↗
37. Teow, K. (2024). Joint Attention in Human-Robot Interaction, a Case of Eye Gaze-Leading Task. [Bachelor’s Thesis, University of Twente].
38. Mazzola, C., Morocutti, L., Pedrizzi, H., Poslon, X.D., Lucny, A., Wingert, S.M., Nagai, Y., Rea, F., and Sciutti, A. (2024, January 20–23). Sketch it for the Robot! How Child-Like Robots’ Joint Attention Affects Humans’ Drawing Strategies. Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL), Austin, TX, USA.10.1109/ICDL61372.2024.10644384 ↗
39. What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology10.1002/asi.20801 ↗
40. O’Brien, H., and Cairns, P. (2016). Why Engagement Matters: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives of User Engagement in Digital Media, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-27446-1 ↗
41. The development and evaluation of a survey to measure user engagement10.1002/asi.21229 ↗
42. Perception of own and robot engagement in human–robot interactions and their dependence on robotics knowledge10.1016/j.robot.2013.09.012 ↗
43. Rich, C., Ponsler, B., Holroyd, A., and Sidner, C.L. (2010, January 2–5). Recognizing engagement in human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2010 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), Osaka, Japan.10.1109/HRI.2010.5453163 ↗
44. Explorations in engagement for humans and robots10.1016/j.artint.2005.03.005 ↗
45. Prendinger, H., Lester, J., and Ishizuka, M. (2008, January 1–3). Estimating User’s Conversational Engagement Based on Gaze Behaviors. Proceedings of the Intelligent Virtual Agents, Tokyo, Japan. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.10.1007/978-3-540-85483-8 ↗
46. Robot initiative in a team learning task increases the rhythm of interaction but not the perceived engagement10.3389/fnbot.2014.00005 ↗
47. Sanghvi, J., Castellano, G., Leite, I., Pereira, A., McOwan, P.W., and Paiva, A. (2011, January 8–11). Automatic analysis of affective postures and body motion to detect engagement with a game companion. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Lausanne, Switzerland. HRI ’11.10.1145/1957656.1957781 ↗
48. Thrun, S., Brooks, R., and Durrant-Whyte, H. (2007, January 26–29). How Social Robots Will Help Us to Diagnose, Treat, and Understand Autism. Proceedings of the Robotics Research, Hiroshima, Japan. Tracts in Advanced Robotics.
49. Learning of Social Signatures Through Imitation Game Between a Robot and a Human Partner10.1109/TAMD.2014.2319861 ↗
50. Evaluating the Engagement with Social Robots10.1007/s12369-015-0298-7 ↗
51. A bio-inspired exogenous attention-based architecture for social robots10.1016/j.eswa.2024.123623 ↗
52. Posner, M. (1984). Components of visual orienting. Attention and Performance X: Control of Language Processes/Lawrence Erlbaum, Lawrence Erlbaum.
53. The vestibular system10.1016/j.cub.2005.07.053 ↗
54. Mini: A new social robot for the elderly10.1007/s12369-020-00687-0 ↗
55. Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B., Faust, J., Foote, T., Leibs, J., Berger, E., Wheeler, R., and Ng, A.Y. (2009, January 12–17). ROS: An open-source Robot Operating System. Proceedings of the ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software, Kobe, Japan.
56. Yoshida, K.T., Kiernan, J.X., Okamura, A.M., and Nunez, C.M. (2023, January 10–13). Exploring human response times to combinations of audio, haptic, and visual stimuli from a mobile device. Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC), Delft, The Netherlands.10.1109/WHC56415.2023.10224375 ↗
57. Hick’s law for choice reaction time: A review10.1080/17470218.2017.1322622 ↗
58. Human express saccades: Extremely short reaction times of goal directed eye movements10.1007/BF00231145 ↗
59. Audiovisual links in exogenous covert spatial orienting10.3758/BF03206843 ↗
60. Mackamul, E.B., and Esteves, A. (2018, January 13–14). A Look at the Effects of Handheld and Projected Augmented-reality on a Collaborative Task. Proceedings of the Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, Berlin, Germany. SUI ’18.10.1145/3267782.3267793 ↗
61. Méndez, E., Crestani, F., Ribeiro, C., David, G., and Lopes, J.C. (2018, January 10–13). User Engagement with Generous Interfaces for Digital Cultural Heritage. Proceedings of the Digital Libraries for Open Knowledge, Porto, Portugal. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
62. Social robots and gamification for technology supported learning: An empirical study on engagement and motivation10.1016/j.chb.2021.106792 ↗
63. Randomized Controlled Caregiver Mediated Joint Engagement Intervention for Toddlers with Autism10.1007/s10803-010-0955-5 ↗
64. Joint engagement is a potential mechanism leading to increased initiations of joint attention and downstream effects on language: JASPER early intervention for children with ASD10.1111/jcpp.13405 ↗