## 4 Discussion and Conclusions  
This study aimed to explore and understand user experiences and reactions during interactions with two distinct types of robots, Pepper and Double 3. The central research question focused on how these interactions influence participants' perceptions, attitudes, and responses toward these AI embodiments. The study findings reveal diverse participant reactions to each robot. Participants expressed a desire for robots that could be easily adjusted to perform various tasks, underscoring the importance of flexibility in robot design (i.e., adaptability). Participants had mixed responses to the robots' imitation of human emotions, with some finding it uncomfortable while others were more receptive (i.e., interaction and behavior). Human interactions were perceived as more nuanced and autonomous compared to the robots, highlighting limitations in the robots' autonomous capabilities (i.e., autonomy). Additionally, participants were hesitant to trust the robots in complex scenarios, emphasizing the need for reliability and credibility in AI systems. The theme of adaptability aligns with [PERSON]'s [7] concept of situativity, where a robot's behavior is adapted to its environment, enhancing user engagement and realism. This desire for adaptable robots underscores the importance of user-centered design principles in integrating AI into everyday life. The mixed reactions to the robots' human-like emotional displays connect with [PERSON]'s [7] mechanisms of interactivity and proxemics. The variation in user comfort levels and perceptions of social presence reinforce the complexity of designing AI systems that balance human-like behavior with mechanical functionality. Perceived limitations in the robots' autonomy reflect ongoing challenges in AI, echoing [PERSON]'s [7] exploration of agency. Although Pepper and Double 3 represent advancements in AI, participants noted their lack of nuanced, independent actions characteristic of human interaction, underscoring the need for further development in autonomous capabilities. Participants' hesitation to trust the robots in complex tasks resonates with the concept of believability [7], suggesting that trust and perceived competence are vital for user acceptance of AI technologies. Discomfort with Pepper's human-like traits also reflects the challenges of navigating the \"uncanny valley\" in AI design, where overly human-like behavior can be unsettling, underscoring the importance of empathetic yet non-intrusive AI. This study's findings regarding embodiment align with research by [PERSON] et al. [4] and [PERSON] [7], who emphasize that the physical form of an AI agent significantly affects user perception and engagement. Participants responded differently to the humanoid form of Pepper and the utilitarian design of Double 3, influencing their interaction and comfort levels. This distinction supports [PERSON]'s observations that embodiment impacts user comfort and ease of interaction with AI agents. Consistent with results presented by [PERSON] et al. [8], some participants felt more comfortable sharing thoughts with Pepper, likely due to its non-threatening, humanoid appearance. However, while it was obvious that Double 3 was controlled by a human, the mode of control of the Pepper robot was more unclear. This may also have impacted the participants' comfort. The participants' perspectives on using robots like Pepper and Double 3 across various sectors--such as healthcare, education, and remote work--mirror insights from [PERSON] [6]. The results suggest that specialized robots can enhance user experience and efficiency in these areas, suggesting that robots designed for specific tasks offer practical value. Moreover, the impact of humanoid features on human-robot interactions, such as communication and relationship-building, aligns with [PERSON] [20] and [PERSON]'s [17] views on the transformative potential of social robots.