On the Death of NAO: Reflections on Robot Platform Choice and Stabilisation of the Human-Robot Interaction Research Field

As a young and inherently interdisciplinary field, Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) shows evidence of multiple, competing and complementary epistemologies and methodologies. However, it is clear that HRI user studies are a valued, primary form of knowledge generation. How might this influence, and be influenced by choice of experimental robot platform? Once a clear, common platform of choice, the number of HRI conference papers detailing work utilising the NAO robot has consistently declined since 2015. We take this opportunity to present quantitative and qualitative data regarding the evolving use and role of the NAO robot in establishing what makes “good science” in HRI, and to reflect on what this might mean for, and can tell us about, the field more broadly. We suggest that shared use of a common platform like NAO is emblematic of, and important for, the field's attempts to stabilise. Access to a common platform supports sharing of knowledge and practices amongst researchers in the field, whilst at the same time produces a set of assumptions about what makes for (seemingly) scientific HRI knowledge, practice or “lore” that will continue to shape the future of the field - even beyond the platform's demise.