Home⇛NRCP Research Journal⇛vol. 22 no. 1 (2023)

SENSE OF AGENCY (SOA) IN HUMAN-HUMANOID TECHNOLOGY (HT) INTERACTIONS IN FLEXIBLE FACE-TO-FACE LEARNING DURING CHALLENGING TIMES: A MULTIMETHOD RESEARCH

MICHAEL JOSEPH DINO | MICHAEL WILLIAM CATAJAN | RAMONITA SALAZAR | ERNESTO LEUTERIO | WILFREDO BASILIO | ARMANDO TECSON, JR. | REYNALDO OLAZO | MA. LUISA UAYAN | CAROLINE MARIAN S. ENRIQUEZ | CHRISTOPHER PATRICIO | JOSEPH CARLO VITAL | ARNEL BUENCAMINO | IRVIN ONG | RAYMOND S. MACATANGGA | IRA FE BORILLO | ROMEO SANO

 

Abstract:

As technological advancement in higher education mainstreams humanoid technologies (HTs) in clinical simulations in medicine and allied health programs, the sense of agency (SoA) involved in human-computer interaction and associated experiences with HT use must be investigated. This study aims to develop and pilot a self-report measure of SoA and explore its connection with the demographic, behavioral intention for technology use, and performance variables among learners (n=456) in a flexible face-to-face learning program during the pandemic. A mixed- method exploratory sequential design was employed, beginning with empirical measurements and analyses (descriptive, comparative, modeling) followed by a qualitative descriptive inquiry via focus group discussions to capture student experiences and practical reasoning associated with HTs and other flexible learning activities. Quantitative results revealed an acceptable tool, demographic and performance differences in SoA measures, and a parsimonious model of SoA and related variables. Qualitative inquiry produces a model eidetic of student experiences and practical reasoning. This project reinforces a shift from technology- centered and human-centered design to a life-centered approach to technology and simulation development.



References:

  1. Ali, J., Dunn, J., Eason, M., & Drumm, J. (2010). Comparing the Standardized Live Trauma Patient and the Mechanical Simulator Models in the ATLS Initial Assessment Station. Journal of Surgical Research, 162(1), 7–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2010.02.029
  2. Barlas, Z. (2019). When robots tell you what to do: Sense of agency in human- and robot-guided actions. Consciousness and Cognition, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2019.102819
  3. Barrot, J. S., Llenares, I. I., & del Rosario, L. S. (2021). Students’ online learning challenges during the pandemic and how they cope with them: The case of the Philippines. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7321–7338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10589-x
  4. Bartlett, R. S., Bruecker, S., & Eccleston, B. (2021). High-Fidelity Simulation Improves Long-Term Knowledge of Clinical Swallow Evaluation. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 30(2), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00240
  5. Betriana, F., Osaka, K., Matsumoto, K., Tanioka, T., & Locsin, R. C. (2021). Relating Mori’s Uncanny Valley in generating conversations with artificial affective communication and natural language processing. Nursing Philosophy, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.12322
  6. Beyer, D. A. (2012). Effectiveness of Human Patient Simulator as A Classroom Teaching Strategy. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8(7), e301–e305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2011.01.005
  7. Blakemore, S.-J., Wolpert, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (1998). Central cancellation of self-produced tickle sensation. Nature Neuroscience, 1(7), 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1038/2870
  8. Borthwick, M., Tomitsch, M., & Gaughwin, M. (2022). From human-centred to life-centred design: Considering environmental and ethical concerns in the design of interactive products. Journal of Responsible Technology, 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100032
  9. Chambon, V., Moore, J. W., & Haggard, P. (2015). TMS stimulation over the inferior parietal cortex disrupts prospective sense of agency. Brain Structure and Function, 220(6), 3627–3639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-014-0878-6
  10. Ciardo, F., Beyer, F., De Tommaso, D., & Wykowska, A. (2020). Attribution of intentional agency towards robots reduces one’s own sense of agency. Cognition, 194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104109
  11. Ciardo, F., De Tommaso, D., Beyer, F., & Wykowska, A. (2018). Reduced Sense of Agency in Human-Robot Interaction. In S. S. Ge, J.-J. Cabibihan, M. A. Salichs, E. Broadbent, H. He, A. R. Wagner, & Á. Castro-González (Eds.), Social Robotics, 11357, pp. 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_43
  12. Commission on Higher Education. (2020). Higher Education Graduates by Sex and Institution Type and Enrollment: AY 2018-19. https://ched.gov.ph/2020-higher-education-facts-and-figures/
  13. Construct Validity. (2004). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412950589.n163
  14. Content Validity. (2010). Encyclopedia of Research Design. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412961288.n74
  15. Dayagbil, F. T., Palompon, D. R., Garcia, L. L., & Olvido, M. M. J. (2021). Teaching and Learning Continuity Amid and Beyond the Pandemic. Frontiers in Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.678692
  16. Dennett, D. C. (1987). The intentional stance. MIT Press.
  17. Dino, M. J. S., Davidson, P. M., Dion, K. W., Szanton, S. L., & Ong, I. L. (2022). Nursing and Human-Computer Interaction in Healthcare Robots for Older People: An Integrative Review. International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances, 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2022.100072
  18. Engbert, K., Wohlschläger, A., & Haggard, P. (2008). Who is causing what? The sense of agency is relational and efferent-triggered. Cognition, 107(2), 693–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.021
  19. Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02056.x
  20. Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864
  21. Esterhazy, R., De Lange, T., & Møystad, A. (2021). How do signature pedagogies get their signatures? The role of assessment and professional artefacts in preparing students for their professions. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 28(2), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2021.1902273
  22. Eycan, Ö., & Ulupinar, S. (2021). Nurse instructors’ perception towards distance education during the pandemic. Nurse Education Today, 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105102
  23. Face Validity. (2004). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412950589.n323
  24. Farrer, C., Frey, S. H., Van Horn, J. D., Tunik, E., Turk, D., Inati, S., & Grafton, S. T. (2008). The Angular Gyrus Computes Action Awareness Representations. Cerebral Cortex, 18(2), 254–261. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhm050
  25. Fiske, A., Henningsen, P., & Buyx, A. (2019). Your Robot Therapist Will See You Now: Ethical Implications of Embodied Artificial Intelligence in Psychiatry, Psychology, and Psychotherapy. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(5), e13216. https://doi.org/10.2196/13216
  26. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  27. Frith, C. D., Blakemore, S.-J., & Wolpert, D. M. (2000). Abnormalities in the awareness and control of action. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 355(1404), 1771–1788. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2000.0734
  28. Geršak, G., Schiebl, M., Nawotka, M., Jugo, E., Ferreira, M. do C., Duffy, A., Rosu, D. M., Pavlásek, P., Sedlák, V., & Pražák, D. (2021). Physiology-based patient simulator for blood pressure meter testing. Measurement: Sensors, 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measen.2021.100260
  29. Given, L. (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909
  30. Grünbaum, T., & Christensen, M. S. (2020). Measures of agency. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2020(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niaa019
  31. Grynszpan, O., Sahaï, A., Hamidi, N., Pacherie, E., Berberian, B., Roche, L., & Saint-Bauzel, L. (2019). The sense of agency in human-human vs human-robot joint action. Consciousness and Cognition, 75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2019.102820
  32. Haggard, P. (2017). Sense of agency in the human brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(4), 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.14
  33. Haggard, P., & Chambon, V. (2012). Sense of agency. Current Biology, 22(10), R390–R392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.040
  34. Hammerstein, S., König, C., Dreisörner, T., & Frey, A. (2021). Effects of COVID-19-Related School Closures on Student Achievement-A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289
  35. Hamstra, S. J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 89(3), 387–392. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000130
  36. Imaizumi, S., & Tanno, Y. (2019). Intentional binding coincides with explicit sense of agency. Consciousness and Cognition, 67, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2018.11.005
  37. Joaquin, J. J. B., Biana, H. T., & Dacela, M. A. (2020). The Philippine Higher Education Sector in the Time of COVID-19. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.576371
  38. Kember, D., Ha, T.-S., Lam, B.-H., Lee, A., Ng, S., Yan, L., & Yum, J. C. K. (1997). The diverse role of the critical friend in supporting educational action research projects. Educational Action Research, 5(3), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650799700200036
  39. Kleinert, R., Plum, P., Heiermann, N., Wahba, R., Chang, D.-H., Hölscher, A. H., & Stippel, D. L. (2016). Embedding a Virtual Patient Simulator in an Interactive Surgical lecture. Journal of Surgical Education, 73(3), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2015.11.006
  40. Konapur, A., Krishnapillai, M. N., Nagalla, B., & Gavaravarapu, S. M. (2019). A sequential, exploratory, mixed-methods approach for development and validation of a context-specific knowledge, attitude and practice questionnaire on micronutrients for literate mothers of school-age children. Public Health Nutrition, 22(11), 2120–2131. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980019000521
  41. Lau, Y., Chee, D. G. H., Chow, X. P., Wong, S. H., Cheng, L. J., & Lau, S. T. (2020). Humanoid robot-assisted interventions among children with diabetes: A systematic scoping review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103749
  42. Leslie, J. L., & Lonneman, W. (2016). Promoting Trust in the Registered Nurse-Patient Relationship. Home Healthcare Now, 34(1), 38–42. https://doi.org/10.1097/NHH.0000000000000322
  43. Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and Quantification Of Content Validity: Nursing Research, 35(6). https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
  44. Marchesi, S., Ghiglino, D., Ciardo, F., Perez-Osorio, J., Baykara, E., & Wykowska, A. (2019). Do We Adopt the Intentional Stance Toward Humanoid Robots? Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 450. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00450
  45. Moore, J., & Haggard, P. (2008). Awareness of action: Inference and prediction. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2006.12.004
  46. Moore, J. W. (2016). What Is the Sense of Agency and Why Does it Matter? Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01272
  47. Mori, M., MacDorman, K., & Kageki, N. (2012). The Uncanny Valley [From the Field]. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 19(2), 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2012.2192811
  48. Mosquera, M. J., Kaat, A., Ring, M., Agarwal, G., Glickson, S., & Victorson, D. (2021). Psychometric properties of a new self-report measure of medical student stress using classic and modern test theory approaches. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01637-0
  49. Mulyadi, M., Tonapa, S. I., Rompas, S. S. J., Wang, R.-H., & Lee, B.-O. (2021). Effects of simulation technology-based learning on nursing students’ learning outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. Nurse Education Today, 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105127
  50. Ortiga, Y. Y., Diño, M. J., & Macabasag, R. L. A. (2022). Clocking out: Nurses refusing to work in a time of pandemic. Social Science & Medicine, 305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115114
  51. Pennisi, P., Tonacci, A., Tartarisco, G., Billeci, L., Ruta, L., Gangemi, S., & Pioggia, G. (2016). Autism and social robotics: A systematic review: Autism and social robotics. Autism Research, 9(2), 165–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1527
  52. Salac, R. A., & Kim, Y. S. (2016). A Study on The Internet Connectivity in The Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Business Review, 1(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.20522/APJBR.2016.1.1.67
  53. Salvador, J. T., Alqahtani, F. M., Sauce, B. R. J., Alvarez, M. O. C., Rosario, A. B., Reyes, L. D., Mohamed, E. R., Awadh, L. A., Sanchez, K. K. B., Alzaid, M., Agman, D. D., & Schonewille, M. A. P. (2020). Development of Student Survey on Writing Nursing Care Plan: An exploratory sequential mixed‐methods study. Journal of Nursing Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12996
  54. Schebesta, K., Hüpfl, M., Ringl, H., Machata, A.-M., Chiari, A., & Kimberger, O. (2011). A comparison of paediatric airway anatomy with the SimBaby high-fidelity patient simulator. Resuscitation, 82(4), 468–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.12.001
  55. Shneiderman, B. (2004). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (4th ed). Pearson/Addison Wesley.
  56. Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1162/0011526054622015
  57. Southall, T. M., & MacDonald, S. (2021). Fostering Undergraduate Medicine, Nursing, and Pharmacy Students’ Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Using High Fidelity Simulation. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.12571
  58. Stowers, K., Oglesby, J., Sonesh, S., Leyva, K., Iwig, C., & Salas, E. (2017). A Framework to Guide the Assessment of Human–Machine Systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59(2), 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720817695077
  59. Stroessner, S. J., & Benitez, J. (2019). The Social Perception of Humanoid and Non-Humanoid Robots: Effects of Gendered and Machinelike Features. International Journal of Social Robotics, 11(2), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0502-7
  60. Swiderska, A., & Küster, D. (2018). Avatars in Pain: Visible Harm Enhances Mind Perception in Humans and Robots. Perception, 47(12), 1139–1152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006618809919
  61. Synofzik, M., Thier, P., Leube, D. T., Schlotterbeck, P., & Lindner, A. (2010). Misattributions of agency in schizophrenia are based on imprecise predictions about the sensory consequences of one’s actions. Brain, 133(1), 262–271. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp291
  62. Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and Opportunities for Higher Education amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Philippine Context. Pedagogical Research, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/7947
  63. Van der Woerdt, S., & Haselager, P. (2019). When robots appear to have a mind: The human perception of machine agency and responsibility. New Ideas in Psychology, 54, 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2017.11.001
  64. Ventre-Dominey, J., Gibert, G., Bosse-Platiere, M., Farnè, A., Dominey, P. F., & Pavani, F. (2019). Embodiment into a robot increases its acceptability. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 10083. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46528-7
  65. Wallace, D., Gillett, B., Wright, B., Stetz, J., & Arquilla, B. (2010). Randomized controlled trial of high fidelity patient simulators compared to actor patients in a pandemic influenza drill scenario. Resuscitation, 81(7), 872–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.02.026
  66. Wallace, R. J. (2015). Practical Reasoning: Philosophical Aspects. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 776–781). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.63063-5
  67. Williamson, J. M. L., & Martin, A. G. (2010). Analysis of patient information leaflets provided by a district general hospital by the Flesch and Flesch-Kincaid method. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 64(13), 1824–1831. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02408.x

Tools


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic