EmCorp Scale
This is the most up-to-date version of this scale.
Construct Summary
A measure to assess users’ subjective perceptions of artificial entities’ capabilities related to embodiment and corporeality. The authors detail four capabilities that can explain effects of varying embodiments. They state those capabilities are (Nonverbal) Expressiveness, (Shared) Perception and Interpretation, Tactile Interaction and Mobility, and Corporeality. They initially define these sub-constructs as follows:
Nonverbal Expressiveness relates to the entity’s ability to express itself with gestures, facial expressions etc. (Shared) Perception refers to perceptual capabilities such as vision and hearing that can (but must not be) shared with the human interaction partner. By Mobility we mean the capability to navigate in space, whereas Tactile Interaction refers to physical contact with humans and objects. The core feature that is directly related to the physical embodiment of robots is Corporeality, i.e., the realism and material existence of the entity in the real world. (p. 372)
Rating = 77%
| Check? | Guideline Item |
|---|---|
| ✓ | Is the construct defined? |
| ✓ | Does the final version of the items capture the construct as it has been defined by the authors? |
| ✓ | Is the item generation process discussed (e.g., literature review, Delphi method, crowd-sourcing)? |
| ✖ | Person to items 10:1 for the initial set of items? |
| ✓ | Did they perform an EFA, PCA, Rasch, or similar test to determine the item to factor relationship? |
| ✓ | Did they describe how they determined number of factors? |
| ✖ | Did they report the full initial set of items? |
| ✖ | Did they provide loadings (EFA) or item fits (Rasch) of all items? |
| ✓ | Is there a description of the item removal process (e.g., using infit/outfit, factor loading minimum value, or cross-loading values)? |
| ✓ | Did they list the final items included in the scale? |
| ✓ | Did they include a factor structure test (e.g., second EFA, CFA, DIF, test for unidimensionality when using Rasch, or similar)? |
| ✓ | Was a measure of reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, McDonalds Omega_h or Omega_t, Tarkkonen’s Rho) reported? |
| ✓ | Was a test of validity (e.g., predictive, concurrent, convergent, discriminant) reported? |
Comments
Full set of items are reportedly listed in the appendix but no link to appendix was provided in the paper. Administered English and German versions simultaneously and data were analyzed on the combined dataset.
Reviewed by Experts ✓
Downloads
PAPER
Hoffmann, L., Bock, N., & Rosenthal vd Pütten, A. M. (2018, February). The peculiarities of robot embodiment (emcorp-scale) development, validation and initial test of the embodiment and corporeality of artificial agents scale. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 370-378).
PDF of scale as well as instructions for administration and scoring are not readily available. Check the paper for more details or email hriscaledatabase@gmail.com to submit this information if you are the author of this scale.
Final Scale Items (20 items):
Items are rated on a 6-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree)
Corporeality
is physically embodied
is existent in the real world
is real
(Nonverbal) Expressiveness
is unrestricted in its actions
is unrestricted in its movements
is unrestricted in its facial expressions
is unrestricted in its gestures
Tactline Interaction and Mobility
is able to autonomously navigate in space
is able to move towards me
is able to touch objects
is able to carry objects
is able to perform designated actions like brewing coffee or vacuuming
is able to move in space
(Shared) Perception and Interpretation
is able to react to the same environmental stimuli as I do
is able to immediately react to my actions
is able to recognize emotions
is able to interpret (my) behaviors
is able to perceive what I perceive
is able to understand my behavior
is able to to perceive my behavior