All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
The paper is acceptable provided the following changes are made:
1) Left panel of Fig.1 should be removed, as it contains personal information and is not relevant to the paper.
2) Please change the sign on the robot in the right panel of Fig. 1 into English.
Based on the reviews, the paper would be acceptable provided that the reviewers' comments, particularly those found in Review #2 be adequately addressed. Experimental assessment of users satisfaction raised in Review #1.
No Comments
No Comments
No Comments
This article reported a new interesting study on how to make information robots be more intelligent, and the obtained results may be helpful to other researchers. I think it may be more valuable if this study could contain the experimental results on users' satisfaction when they interact with an information robot.
'information' (with quotations) indicates that the authors used the word in a special meaning, but it was used as in the range of the general meaning, such as direction-giving. So, I would like to suggest you get rid of the quotations. Also, in the title, it would be grammatically appropriate if it was "What should we know to develop 'information' robots?" or "What should we know to develop a 'information' robot?"
I found grammatical errors and typos in writing. I would like you to revise those error. The authors should use native check for the paper.
The study designs and analysis methods are appropriate.
The findings are offered with statistics, and the interpretations are appropriately stated.
The paper reports an development of a direction-giving robot (knowledge and algorithms) and field studies exploring the effects of self-introduction in direction-giving interaction.
The study was interesting. I believe the contributions described in the paper were sufficient for publishing.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.