The disruptive approach of the designer in an academic research project. The designer is misbehaving in order to explore limits and possible relations. We show this approach in a research project on social robots.

1. The disruptive approach of
the designer in an academic
research project.
Frédérique PAIN
Head of Strate Research & Innovation
Strate School of Design
f.pain@stratecollege.fr
Ioana OCNARESCU
PhD, Strate Research & Innovation
Strate School of Design
i.ocnarescu@stratecollege.fr

2. 2

3. 3
“Abuse is more
funny than use.”
Sara Ilstedt at DRS2014 conversation on
with James Auger, Sara Ilstedt, Eva Knutz, Thomas Markussen

4. 4
Designers and design researchers
in Romeo2 project

5. 5
Designers draw scenarios
and robot faces.

6. 6
but
also challenge
the idea, forms
interactions &
relations with
social robots.

7. 7
Les Robots
Isaac Asimov
Black Mirror
S2, ep.1

8. 8
FOCUS GROUP
basic human needs
tasks
waking-up, hygine, eating,
dressing, transportation,
etc.
function
task-oriented approach
Design approach
complex needs
imaginary
dignity, alterity, social
relations, interaction etc.
human experience
user studies in robotics

9. 9
“Anubis embodies all these
symbols in a search for
eternity.”
Fabien Chancel
why humanoid
robots?

10. 10
drawings by Fabien Chancel
other alternatives - forms?

11. 11
fabricationdrawing
other alternatives - costs?

12. 12
ANUBIS
protos intermediary objects

13. 13
how to test robots that are not
“real” for the moment ?

14. 14
F ke ita until you make it !
NAO ROMEO
(en carton)
ANUBIS

15. 15
Stop motion videos

16. 16
Conceptual model to study
human-robot relation:
1. functionality,
2. safety,
3. operation,
4. mutual care,
5. appearance.
(Frennert et al.1, 2013)
the use of social agents is deter-
mined:
conditions, perceived usefulness,
perceived ease of use, perceived,
enjoyment, attitude and trust.
(Heerink et al., 2010)
A. Supporting age related changes,
B. Supporting social interaction,
C. Robot aesthetics:
1) non anthropomorphic design;
2) anthropomorphic design;
3) physical space;
4) indoor adjustments.
(Frennert et al.2, 2013)
affecting acceptance are: safety, ac-
cessibility, usability, practical ben-
gains, and the social intelligence
of the robot
(Young et al., 2009)

17. 17
> not there only to show answers but to inspire discussion and
> video + physical prototype: to embody possibilities of interaction
with social robots.
drawings by Ryslaine Moulay

18. 18
Scénarios
Stop-Motion &
Applications
Prototypes
vidéo
applicat°
vidéo
vidéo
M1
M2
M3
M4
TOTAL 72 personnes

19. 19
FIRST RESULTS
TV.
it (he) bothers me less
than I imagined.
tool vs. friend
strange” at the end “he
is rather funny”
rather a tool.
not so robust, but precise.
it makes me think at StarGate

20. 20
Conclusions
> design approach vs. task-oriented approach;
> the role of the design object in the research process;
> misbehave is more than fun, it is about exploration, limits and questions.

21. 21
The disruptive approach of
the designer in an academic
research project.
Frédérique PAIN
Head of Strate Research & Innovation
Strate School of Design
f.pain@stratecollege.fr
Ioana OCNARESCU
PhD, Strate Research & Innovation
Strate School of Design
i.ocnarescu@stratecollege.fr

22. 22
Brief
Scenarios
Final
scenarios
analysis
SOA
Focus group
Design
I. II. III. IV. V.
START OBSERVE BUILD STUDY & TEST ANALYSE
to better understand what means interaction with
social robots!
Here is our process