An Introduction
to Roomba
Roomba is a vacuum-cleaning
robot sold by iRobot that moves
around flat surfaces autonomous-
ly. It is programmed to optimally
vacuum a place, with sensors that
enable it to detect obstacles; for
instance, it does not fall down
stairs. It says a few sentences,
such as “Roomba error 2” and
“Please charge Roomba.” The
models used for our research all
have a docking station where the
Roomba goes back to recharge,
three buttons (start; dock, to go
back to the docking station; and
spot, to vacuum around a precise
spot), and some have virtual walls
(infrared walls that force the robot
to stay within a defined perimeter).
To use it, one can push a button
and then walk away. Roomba does
not scratch any furniture. It does
not break anything except very
fragile objects in its path. Never-
theless, it is likely to get caught up
in cables lying around.

was that they managed to reduce their cleaning efforts with few adaptation efforts (little to be learned, few modifications of their homes and habits). For the other households, Roomba still needed some design modifications. First, it was not usable across a wide variety of physical environments (e.g., houses with clutter on the floor or with thick carpets or door sills). Second, it needed to be more convincing in terms of reducing cleaning efforts (e.g., vacuuming faster while being less noisy) and increasing cleanliness (e.g., not releasing balls of dust, vacuuming well in corners). We believe that what could also increase adoption is more transparent communication of Roomba’s capacities (e.g., how long it normally takes to vacuum how many square meters). People are not interested in knowing about Roomba’s features but rather in how to optimally use it—for instance, how to use its virtual walls or whether or not to leave it to roam the house on its own.

robot that talks does, at first, raise enthusiasm. On the other hand, one of our participants said he did not want to have conversations with his vacuum cleaner. We believe that in order to answer these questions, an appropriate approach would be to do a comparative study of new generations of robots based on longitudinal ethnographic research. Good things come to those who are patient—and willing to give new technologies a try.

 

ENDNOTES:

1. This research is part of a wider nationally funded research program which ambitions to foster the introduction of robots in private environments (NCCR http://www.nccr-robotics.ch/). 2. According to Sung et al. [ 5, 8], usage patterns of a Roomba settle after two months. 3. Venkatesh, V., Bala, H. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences 39, 2 (2008). 4. Brown, S., Venkatesh, V. Model of adoption of technology in households: A baseline model test and extension incorporating household lifecycle. MIS quarterly 29, 3 (2005), 399-426. 5. Sung, J., Christensen, H.I., and Grinter, R.E. Robots in the wild: Understanding long-term use. Proc. HRI 2009. 6. Fink, J., Bauwens, V., Mubin, O., Kaplan, F., and Dillenbourg, P. People’s perception of domestic robots: Same household, same opinion? Proc. ICSR 2011 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands), accepted for publication. 7. Forlizzi, J., DiSalvo, C. Service robots in the domestic environment: A study of the Roomba vacuum in the home. Proc. HRI 2006 (Salt Lake City, UT). ACM Press, New York, 2006, 258-265. 8. Sung, J., Grinter, R.E., and Christensen, H.I. Domestic robot ecology. An initial framework to unpack long-term acceptance of robots at home. Int J Soc Robot 2, 4 (2010), 417-429.

March + April 2012

households? At this stage, we believe one should talk about an evolution rather than a revolution. First, the domestic robots available today on the market are still used in few situations (e.g., cleaning gutters, mowing lawns, etc.). Second, according to our study, only a minority of households adopted Roomba. Indeed, it did not prove robustly adaptable to any kind of physical environment. Third, Roomba has not had a major impact on practices at home. Even though previous research indicated that Roomba would motivate people to renegotiate task responsibilities around cleaning [ 7, 8], we did not notice that; it simply enabled some participants to get rid of some vacuuming tasks.

 

interactions

Lessons for Roomba’s Designers Roomba proved to be an outstanding cleaning companion for some of our families. What convinced them

DOI: 10.1145/2090150.2090165
© 2012 ACM 1072-5220/12/03 $10.00

Lessons for Future Service Robots How can we transfer these lessons to future robots? Future domestic-service robots should definitely focus on enabling their users to quickly experience their usefulness, with low adaptation efforts. When it comes to solving the issue of the physical space, there are different paths to follow. Should Roomba really become an all-around vacuum cleaner, riding up stairs, dealing with books and thick carpets? Wouldn’t a vacuum cleaner be more efficient if it were specialized? We have seen in our research that the cleaning pain points are often linked to specific spots in the house (e.g., the kitchen table, the entry hall). It also isn’t clear what should be undertaken in terms of interactive capabilities. On the one hand, a ABOUT THE AUTHORS Valérie Bauwens works in the CRAF T department at the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) studying the adoption of robots in homes. She is the founder of www.human- centricity.com, which specializes in ethnographic market research and teaching ethnography. Julia Fink is a Ph. D. candidate in the CRAF T department at the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), studying human-robot interaction in domestic environments. She has a multidisciplinary background in media, technology, and communication.