Frank Bernieri | Oregon State University (original) (raw)
Related Authors
National Research University “Higher School of Economics” (HSE), Moscow, Russia
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Uploads
Papers by Frank Bernieri
Human-Robot Interaction, Mar 7, 2016
We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for s... more We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for specifying which objects should be kept private (i.e., not visible) in an office environment. Our study context is a robot "janitor" system that has the ability to blur out specified objects from its video feed. One interface is a traditional point-and-click GUI on a computer monitor, while the other two operate in the real, physical space: users either place markers on the objects to indicate privacy or use a wand tool to point at them. This late-breaking report presents qualitative feedback from users for improving the interfaces.
We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for s... more We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for specifying which objects should be kept private (i.e., not visible) in an office environment. Our study context is a robot “janitor” system that has the ability to blur out specified objects from its video feed. One interface is a traditional point-and-click GUI on a computer monitor, while the other two operate in the real, physical space: users either place markers on the objects to indicate privacy or use a wand tool to point at them. We compare the interfaces using both self-report (e.g., surveys) and behavioral measures. Our results showed that (1) the graphical interface performed better both in terms of time and usability, and (2) using persistent markers increased the participants' ability to recall what they tagged. Choosing the right interface appears to depend on the application scenario. We also summarize feedback from the participants for improving interfaces that specify visual privacy preferences.
High self-monitors are "social chameleons" who monitor and control their expressive behavior with... more High self-monitors are "social chameleons" who monitor and control their expressive behavior with the goal of producing favorable impressions on others (Snyder, 1987). Low self-monitors are less motivated by self-presentation goals and exhibit behavioral consistency that more closely reflects their attitudes, internal states, and assessed traits (Snyder, 1987). 1.___ My behavior with my romantic interest is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 2.___While with my romantic interest, I'm not always the person I appear to be. 3.___In order to get along and be liked, I tend to be what my romantic interest expects me to be rather than anything else. 1.___ My behavior at work is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 2.___ While at work, I'm not always the person I appear to be. 3.___ In order to get along and be liked at work I tend to be what people expect me to be rather than anything else.
Original submission was .pub with Microsoft Publisher 2010. File was converted to .pdf using Micr... more Original submission was .pub with Microsoft Publisher 2010. File was converted to .pdf using Microsoft Publisher 2010.
Psychology, 2018
Optimists hold positive expectancies for their future, which some have suggested leads to advanta... more Optimists hold positive expectancies for their future, which some have suggested leads to advantages in the social realm (Carver, Scheier, & Segerstrom, 2010). Unfortunately, the research supporting this notion is scant and suffers from the confound that self-reports from optimists reflect their optimistic perspective. To address this issue, the present study examined the impact of optimism on interpersonal outcomes assessed from the perspective of those in relationships with each target. We recruited 182 participants to complete a series of psychological measures and interpersonal activities over the course of ten weeks. Participants rated themselves and each other on the five-factor traits at three stages in the developing relationship: zero-acquaintance, after their first conversation with each other, and after nine weeks of acquaintance. Two additional informants nominated by each target as those who knew them well (i.e. friends or family members) provided more extensive personality descriptions using a California Q-Set. Optimists consistently rated themselves as more agreeable and less neurotic than those low in optimism, but only the difference in neuroticism was detectable by perceivers. Furthermore, this difference was discernable only after nine-weeks of acquaintanceship had been established. Target optimism had no impact on first impressions. Although there may exist an optimistic personality profile across the five major traits, we found little evidence to suggest that anything other than lower neuroticism contributes to the impact that optimism might have on one's social life and relationships.
Human-Robot Interaction, Mar 7, 2016
We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for s... more We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for specifying which objects should be kept private (i.e., not visible) in an office environment. Our study context is a robot "janitor" system that has the ability to blur out specified objects from its video feed. One interface is a traditional point-and-click GUI on a computer monitor, while the other two operate in the real, physical space: users either place markers on the objects to indicate privacy or use a wand tool to point at them. This late-breaking report presents qualitative feedback from users for improving the interfaces.
We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for s... more We present a study that examines the efficiency and usability of three different interfaces for specifying which objects should be kept private (i.e., not visible) in an office environment. Our study context is a robot “janitor” system that has the ability to blur out specified objects from its video feed. One interface is a traditional point-and-click GUI on a computer monitor, while the other two operate in the real, physical space: users either place markers on the objects to indicate privacy or use a wand tool to point at them. We compare the interfaces using both self-report (e.g., surveys) and behavioral measures. Our results showed that (1) the graphical interface performed better both in terms of time and usability, and (2) using persistent markers increased the participants' ability to recall what they tagged. Choosing the right interface appears to depend on the application scenario. We also summarize feedback from the participants for improving interfaces that specify visual privacy preferences.
High self-monitors are "social chameleons" who monitor and control their expressive behavior with... more High self-monitors are "social chameleons" who monitor and control their expressive behavior with the goal of producing favorable impressions on others (Snyder, 1987). Low self-monitors are less motivated by self-presentation goals and exhibit behavioral consistency that more closely reflects their attitudes, internal states, and assessed traits (Snyder, 1987). 1.___ My behavior with my romantic interest is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 2.___While with my romantic interest, I'm not always the person I appear to be. 3.___In order to get along and be liked, I tend to be what my romantic interest expects me to be rather than anything else. 1.___ My behavior at work is usually an expression of my true inner feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. 2.___ While at work, I'm not always the person I appear to be. 3.___ In order to get along and be liked at work I tend to be what people expect me to be rather than anything else.
Original submission was .pub with Microsoft Publisher 2010. File was converted to .pdf using Micr... more Original submission was .pub with Microsoft Publisher 2010. File was converted to .pdf using Microsoft Publisher 2010.
Psychology, 2018
Optimists hold positive expectancies for their future, which some have suggested leads to advanta... more Optimists hold positive expectancies for their future, which some have suggested leads to advantages in the social realm (Carver, Scheier, & Segerstrom, 2010). Unfortunately, the research supporting this notion is scant and suffers from the confound that self-reports from optimists reflect their optimistic perspective. To address this issue, the present study examined the impact of optimism on interpersonal outcomes assessed from the perspective of those in relationships with each target. We recruited 182 participants to complete a series of psychological measures and interpersonal activities over the course of ten weeks. Participants rated themselves and each other on the five-factor traits at three stages in the developing relationship: zero-acquaintance, after their first conversation with each other, and after nine weeks of acquaintance. Two additional informants nominated by each target as those who knew them well (i.e. friends or family members) provided more extensive personality descriptions using a California Q-Set. Optimists consistently rated themselves as more agreeable and less neurotic than those low in optimism, but only the difference in neuroticism was detectable by perceivers. Furthermore, this difference was discernable only after nine-weeks of acquaintanceship had been established. Target optimism had no impact on first impressions. Although there may exist an optimistic personality profile across the five major traits, we found little evidence to suggest that anything other than lower neuroticism contributes to the impact that optimism might have on one's social life and relationships.