Rosalind W. Picard
- Personal Homepage
Professor Rosalind W. Picard, Sc.D. is founder and director of the Affective Computing Research Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Laboratory, co-director of the Things That Think Consortium, the largest industrial sponsorship organization at the lab, and leader of the new and growing Autism & Communication Technology Initiative at MIT. She is co-founder, chief scientist and chairman of Affectiva, Inc., making technology to help measure and communicate emotion.
- Publication period start
- Publication period end
- Number of co-authors
Number of publications with favourite co-authors
Most productive colleagues in number of publications
Hernandez, Javier, Hoque, Mohammed (Ehsan), Drevo, Will, Picard, Rosalind W. (2012): Mood meter: counting smiles in the wild. In: Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Uniquitous Computing , 2012, . pp. 301-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2370216.2370264
Sano, Akane, Hernandez, Javier, Deprey, Jean, Eckhardt, Micah, Goodwin, Matthew S., Picard, Rosalind W. (2012): Multimodal annotation tool for challenging behaviors in people with Autism spectrum disord. In: Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Uniquitous Computing , 2012, . pp. 737-740.
Morris, Robert R., Kirschbaum, Connor R., Picard, Rosalind W. (2010): Broadening accessibility through special interests: a new approach for software customizat. In: Twelfth Annual ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Assistive Technologies , 2010, . pp. 171-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1878803.1878834
Picard, Rosalind W. (2009): Robots with emotional intelligence. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction , 2009, . pp. 5-6. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1514095.1514098
Madsen, Miriam, Kaliouby, Rana El, Eckhardt, Micah, Hoque, Mohammed E., Goodwin, Matthew S., Picard, Rosalind W. (2009): Lessons from participatory design with adolescents on the autism spectrum. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2009 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 2009, . pp. 3835-3840. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1520340.1520580
Kim, Kyunghee, Picard, Rosalind W., Lieberman, Henry (2008): Common sense assistant for writing stories that teach social skills. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008, . pp. 2805-2810. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1358628.1358765
Lee, Chia-Hsun Jackie, Morris, Rob, Goodwin, Matthew, Picard, Rosalind W. (2008): Lessons learned from a pilot study quantifying face contact and skin conductance in teens . In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008, . pp. 3147-3152. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1358628.1358822
Madsen, Miriam, Kaliouby, Rana El, Goodwin, Matthew, Picard, Rosalind W. (2008): Technology for just-in-time in-situ learning of facial affect for persons diagnosed with a. In: Tenth Annual ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Assistive Technologies , 2008, . pp. 19-26. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1414471.1414477
Lee, Chia-Hsun Jackie, Kim, Kyunghee, Breazeal, Cynthia, Picard, Rosalind W. (2008): Shybot: friend-stranger interaction for children living with autism. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008, . pp. 3375-3380. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1358628.1358860
Breazeal, Cynthia, Wang, Andrew, Picard, Rosalind W. (2007): Experiments with a robotic computer: body, affect and cognition interactions. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction , 2007, . pp. 153-160. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1228716.1228737
Ahn, Hyungil, Teeters, Alea, Wang, Andrew, Breazeal, Cynthia, Picard, Rosalind W. (2007): Stoop to Conquer: Posture and Affect Interact to Influence Computer Users\' Persistence. In: Paiva, Ana, Prada, Rui, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) ACII 2007 - Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, Second International Conference September 12-14, 2007, Lisbon, Portugal. pp. 582-593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74889-2_51
Picard, Rosalind W., Liu, Karen K. (2007): Relative subjective count and assessment of interruptive technologies applied to mobile mo. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65 (4) pp. 361-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.11.019
Kapoor, Ashish, Burleson, Winslow, Picard, Rosalind W. (2007): Automatic prediction of frustration. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65 (8) pp. 724-736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2007.02.003
Larson, K., Hazlett, R. L., Chaparro, B. S., Picard, Rosalind W. (2006): Measuring the Aesthetics of Reading. In: Proceedings of the HCI06 Conference on People and Computers XX , 2006, . pp. 41-56.
Kapoor, Ashish, Picard, Rosalind W. (2005): Multimodal affect recognition in learning environments. In: Zhang, Hongjiang, Chua, Tat-Seng, Steinmetz, Ralf, Kankanhalli, Mohan S., Wilcox, Lynn (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on Multimedia November 6-11, 2005, Singapore. pp. 677-682. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1101149.1101300
Picard, Rosalind W. (2005): Emotional Intelligence in Agents and Interactive Computers. In: Chen, Chin-Sheng, Filipe, Joaquim, Seruca, Isabel, Cordeiro, José (eds.) ICEIS 2005 - Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems May 25-28, 2005, Miami, USA. pp. 9-10.
Ahn, Hyungil, Picard, Rosalind W. (2005): Affective-Cognitive Learning and Decision Making: A Motivational Reward Framework for Affe. In: Tao, Jianhua, Tan, Tieniu, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) ACII 2005 - Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, First International Conference October 22-24, 2005, Beijing, China. pp. 866-873. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11573548_111
Strauss, Marc, Reynolds, Carson, Hughes, Stephen, Park, Kyoung, McDarby, Gary, Picard, Rosalind W. (2005): The HandWave Bluetooth Skin Conductance Sensor. In: Tao, Jianhua, Tan, Tieniu, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) ACII 2005 - Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, First International Conference October 22-24, 2005, Beijing, China. pp. 699-706. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/11573548_90
Picard, Rosalind W. (2003): Affective computing: challenges. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1 (0) pp. 55-64.
Picard, Rosalind W. (2003): Affective computing: challenges. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59 (1) pp. 55-64.
Picard, Rosalind W. (2003): Computers That Recognize and Respond to User Emotion. In: Brusilovsky, Peter, Corbett, Albert T., Rosis, Fiorella De (eds.) User Modeling 2003 - 9th International Conference - UM 2003 June 22-26, 2003, Johnstown, PA, USA. pp. 2. http://link.springer.de/link/service/series/0558/bibs/2702/27020002.htm
Mueller, Florian, Agamanolis, Stefan, Picard, Rosalind W. (2003): Exertion interfaces: sports over a distance for social bonding and fun. In: Cockton, Gilbert, Korhonen, Panu (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2003 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference April 5-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA. pp. 561-568.
Aist, Gregory, Kort, Barry, Reilly, Rob, Mostow, Jack, Picard, Rosalind W. (2002): Experimentally Augmenting an Intelligent Tutoring System with Human-Supplied Capabilities:. In: Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces , 2002, . pp. 483. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/846222.847701
Aist, Gregory, Kort, Barry, Reilly, Rob, Mostow, Jack, Picard, Rosalind W. (2002): Experimentally Augmenting an Intelligent Tutoring System with Human-Supplied Capabilities:. In: 4th IEEE International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces - ICMI 2002 14-16 October, 2002, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. pp. 483-490. http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/icmi/2002/1834/00/18340483abs.htm
Scheirer, Jocelyn, Fernandez, Raul, Klein, Jonathan, Picard, Rosalind W. (2002): Frustrating the user on purpose: a step toward building an affective computer. In Interacting with Computers, 14 (2) pp. 93-118.
Picard, Rosalind W., Scheirer, J. C. (2001): The Galvactivator: A Glove that Senses and Communicates Skin Conductivity. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction , 2001, . pp. 1538-1542.
Picard, Rosalind W., Vyzas, Elias, Healey, Jennifer (2001): Toward machine emotional intelligence: analysis of affective physiological state. In IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 23 (10) pp. 1175-1191.
Reynolds, C., Picard, Rosalind W. (2001): Designing for Affective Interactions. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction , 2001, . pp. 499-503.
Picard, Rosalind W. (2000): Synthetic Emotion. In IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 20 (1) pp. 52-53. http://csdl.computer.org/comp/mags/cg/2000/01/g1052abs.htm
Picard, Rosalind W. (1999): Affective Computing for HCI. In: Bullinger, Hans-Jorg (eds.) HCI International 1999 - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction August 22-26, 1999, Munich, Germany. pp. 829-833.
Hayes-Roth, Barbara, Ball, Gene, Lisetti, Christine, Picard, Rosalind W., Stern, Andrew (1998): Affect and Emotion in the User Interface. In: Marks, Joe (eds.) International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces 1998 January 6-9, 1998, San Francisco, California, USA. pp. 91-94. http://www.acm.org/pubs/articles/proceedings/uist/268389/p91-hayes-roth/p91-hayes-roth.pdf
Starner, Thad, Mann, Steve, Rhodes, Bradley J., Levine, Jeffrey, Healey, Jennifer, Kirsch, Dana, Picard, Rosalind W., Pentland, Alex (1997): Augmented Reality Through Wearable Computing. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6 (4) pp. 386-398.
12.4 Commentary by Rosalind W. Picard
This was an interesting chapter for me to try to understand and there is a banquet here for discussion, although I only have time to address one of the main dishes.
First, I want to say that I greatly appreciate the work of Kia Höök and others she cites to develop technologies for enhancing people’s awareness of affect and helping people better reflect on and understand emotions, of self and others. I also deeply appreciate the work of designers to address holistic situations and design for people, including their feelings but also never only their feelings. These goals – creating interactions and designs that enhance affective understanding and that respond to the richness of human needs – are truly significant for improving much of what it means to be human. That said, I would like to correct an important misconception. Let me start with a story.
It was 1999 and Joe LeDoux, Antonio Damasio, and I had been invited to give talks on Emotion & Knowledge for the Barcelona Museum. The talks were simultaneously translated into multiple languages, giving me time to speak carefully and slowly in English, relying on the hard work of people more talented than I to translate into Catalan, Spanish, French, and more. It was a great experience overall – meeting fascinating people and engaging deeply in topics that were new and stimulating. But, there was one negative part that stands out in my memory. At the reception, a dark, trim, middle-aged man came striding in my direction, red-faced, furrowed brow, gesturing sharply, and having a hard time speaking. I’ve never seen somebody so angry in a museum. I glanced around me, thinking he was targeting somebody nearby who tried to steal his wife, after all, I was just nibbling on a canape. But his anger was at me. I swallowed, listened carefully, and gradually came to understand that in the language he was hearing my talk translated, he heard me claim something to the effect of “We have built or could now build human emotion into computers.” I was actually extremely careful to NOT say that, but in his mind, I was denying the special feelings and experience we have that accompany human emotion, and reducing the great riches of our emotional experience entirely down to something like a text editor or game app. Listening to him, I realized that my careful choice of words in English, to say what we were doing precisely, and what I thought could be done, was translated inaccurately from my engineering culture, to his culture, which was social psychology.
In that reception, I learned, painfully, that what I meant by “modeling” was very different than what he heard when I said that word. I learned it was not enough to just be very careful with my words stating what we’re doing. I needed to also anticipate how people from different fields could misinterpret what I said. I needed to learn to make additional clarifying remarks of what I did not mean. I should have said not only, “These are some of the mechanisms related to emotion that we are able to implement,” but also, “These are not all of what emotion is.” I should have said not only “by ‘mechanisms of’ I mean ‘Attempts to represent’,” but also, “Representing is not the same as reproducing.” I did not realize he would otherwise be led to the wrong conclusion.
Why do I bring up this story? Höök’s article refers to the Affective Computing approach as cognitivistic and reductionist, which is quite similar to the misunderstanding that happened in Barcelona in 1999.
When I speak or write of mechanisms of emotion, or models of emotion, I speak as an engineer trying to represent a complex phenomenon as best we can with tools we have: I do not confuse these representations with emotion itself. I am not a reductionist and Affective Computing is not reductionistic. I do not believe that emotion can be reduced to these representations, nor does Affective Computing claim this. I do not believe that emotion is “nothing but” the mechanisms we identify and build. The mechanisms we implement are not equivalent to the riches of human emotional experience, nor have I ever said that they will be: We have no evidence to make such claims. If people want to believe that emotions are entirely reducible to logical computation and bits, then that belief is based on faith, not science.
While people can write about any concept using information and bits, including emotion, I do not see evidence supporting the view that emotion can be fully reduced to bits and information. When I wrote Affective Computing, I knew many readers would be from AI, and would want to know how emotion might be implemented in machines, and so I described the parts of that process that I could envision. I was also very careful in my wording to not promote that such a method would be sufficient. However, I had not yet encountered the man in Barcelona, so one has to read my words carefully.
Unfortunately, if a person’s views are multi-dimensional, people will try to reduce them to one dimension, and conveniently peg them on one hook or the other. The process is rather like tidying up the foyer by hanging each jacket on whatever hook happens to be available and strong enough to hold it up. Cognitivism is a handy hook, promoting the belief that thought can be fully reduced to rules and algorithms.
Cognitivism was a strong influence for AI pioneers like my friend and colleague, Marvin Minsky, who kept telling me “Emotions are just a special kind of thought”, a sentence I disagreed with him on regularly and once get him to at least compromise by removing the word “just”. Marvin believed bodies were irrelevant, except during infancy when people needed to be touched, else (studies showed) they withered and died. I have met other pioneers in AI who thought similarly. I am not of their camp, and my writings in Affective Computing talk about the body and about aspects of conscious experience that we haven’t a clue how to implement in information and bits. There are some researchers who work in Affective Computing who hold a cognitivist view, but Affective Computing is not cognitivist.
Yes, Affective Computing includes some models and some researchers whose work might fit on a cognitivist hook, e.g. the cognitive rule-based models like OCC’s could hang on a cognitivist hook for people who believe that approach could fully account for emotion (I don’t). The stochastic signal-representing models of affect in speech or facial expression dynamics might hang on a different hook, and there are other hooks as well. The closet can be better organized than I have taken time to write about, especially as new garments keep arriving. But don’t confuse the hooks with the house.
For some supportive examples, see “Chapter 1: Emotions are Physical and Cognitive” in Affective Computing (1997), containing some of my earliest writings on the need for a combined body-mind view in emotion research. That clearly does not fit on the cognitivist hook. Similarly, readers might be interested in the emphasis I placed on machines continusly co-creating interactions with people, taking into account not only emotion but also context and more, which resonates with the other areas Kia Höök’s article attempts to delineate (more examples are in “Chapter 8: Affective Wearables, see sections such as “Out of the lab and into the world.”) An affective technology does not have to use a formal AI model of emotion, or use discrete emotion recognition or a pattern classifier to fall under the area of affective computing.
But enough about organizing. I think the splitting and naming of pieces of a pie – whether it is an “affective computing pie” or some other kind of pie, is not as interesting as another question I see lurking behind the drive of some designers to separate themselves from a more objective engineering approach: Are emotions fully describable or are they ineffable?
In our work we have described emotion computationally and semantically, in numerous ways – discrete, dimensioned, numeric, semantic, as well as by quantifying creative behaviors, facial expressions, signal measurements of physiology and more. In no case do I think that we have “fully captured” human emotion with our models, methods, or descriptions. Something remains undescribed.
Affective computing often (but not always) tries to describe, objectively, more about emotion than has ever been described subjectively. Much of my work has pushed to make concrete, precise, in an engineering sense, measures of things that previously had only been addressed with words, self-report, questionnaires, whether applied to internal feelings or to outwardly observed behaviors. I am bothered by the way all subjective measurement methods are themselves influenced by emotion, and I want something more objective. Objective measures, however, do not imply reductionism any more than subjective measures imply reductionism. Both approaches “reduce” emotion to something – words, numbers, pictures, “blobby objects.” Using a representation is not being reductionistic. Reductionism is when people take an additional leap and say our emotions are “nothing but” what the computer is representing. The latter leap is one I have never promoted (except through mistranslated remarks).
When I closed my conversation with the man in Barcelona, we realized we were both deeply interested in better understanding emotion, and we realized that our perceived differences were actually not differences at all. Efforts to model do not imply a view of reductionism. Working to build representations that imitate some functions of emotions based on rules and categories does not mean cognitivism. Implementation of affective measures in bits does not mean emotion is only information. Affective computing creates tools toward greater goals – toward greater understanding of what makes us human. The man and I exchanged a hearty handshake and a smile before he departed.
I still have a lot to learn about communicating what we are trying to do with emotion – it’s a big topic, and it’s not one that just an engineering approach can conquer. I’m thrilled, as an engineer, to be sharing the journey with people from social psychology, design, neuroscience, AI, as well as many other arts and sciences. Together we’ll figure out much more than if we set up different camps.
The original definition I gave of affective computing is broader than the one Kia paraphrases: Computing (includes machines, robots, phones, sensors, smart clothing, anything that can do computation) that relates to, arises from, or deliberately influences emotion or other affective phenomena. This was never just about AI or HCI, or about making intelligent machines, although those were the largest communities I was trying to convince to work on emotion at the time.
Perhaps I can be permitted to close, using the opening I wrote in 1997, which still rings true today:
Paiva, Ana, Prada, Rui, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction September 12-14, 2007, Lisbon, Portugal.
Tao, Jianhua, Tan, Tieniu, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction 22-24 October, 2005, Beijing, China.
Paiva, Ana, Prada, Rui, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) ACII 2007 - Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, Second International Conference September 12-14, 2007, Lisbon, Portugal.
Tao, Jianhua, Tan, Tieniu, Picard, Rosalind W. (eds.) ACII 2005 - Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, First International Conference October 22-24, 2005, Beijing, China.