Abstract
Trust has been established to be a key factor in fostering human-robot interactions. However, trust can change overtime according to different factors, including a breach of trust due to a robot’s error. In this exploratory study, we observed people’s interactions with a companion robot in a real house, adapted for human-robot interaction experimentation, over three weeks. The interactions happened in six scenarios in which a robot performed different tasks under two different conditions. Each condition included fourteen tasks performed by the robot, either correctly, or with errors with severe consequences on the first or last day of interaction. At the end of each experimental condition, participants were presented with an emergency scenario to evaluate their trust in the robot. We evaluated participants’ trust in the robot by observing their decision to trust the robot during the emergency scenario, and by collecting their views through questionnaires. We concluded that there is a correlation between the timing of an error with severe consequences performed by the robot and the corresponding loss of trust of the human in the robot. In particular, people’s trust is subjected to the initial mental formation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The participant were not be invited to go to the kitchen, and the experimenter only pretended that the gas was still on.
- 2.
NOTE: The emergency situation was a simulation and participants were never in any danger. We played a pre-recorded audio of a fire siren on a speaker in a corner close to the participant. The red colour of a ceiling light in the experimental room was activated by the experimenter using a remote control. In order not to upset the house’s neighbours, the alarm sound was played loud enough for the participants to be heard inside the house, but not outside.
- 3.
Mojin Robotics https://mojin-robotics.de/en.
- 4.
The University of Hertfordshire Robot House is a four-bedroom British house, fitted out as smart home, equipped with the latest generation of robotics platforms and sensors. robothouse.herts.ac.uk.
References
Ambady, N., Bernieri, F.J., Richeson, J.A.: Toward a histology of social behavior: judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 32, 201–271 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(00)80006-4
Booth, S., Tompkin, J., Pfister, H., Waldo, J., Gajos, K., Nagpal, R.: Piggybacking robots: human-robot overtrust in university dormitory security. In: 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 426–434. ACM (2017)
Chekroun, P., Brauer, M.: The bystander effect and social control behavior: the effect of the presence of others on people’s reactions to norm violations. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 32(6), 853–867 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.126
Choi, J.J., Kim, Y., Kwak, S.S.: The autonomy levels and the human intervention levels of robots: the impact of robot types in human-robot interaction. In: The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 1069–1074 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926394
Dautenhahn, K.: Roles and functions of robots in human society: implications from research in autism therapy. Robotica 21(4), 443–452 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0263574703004922
Gosling, S.D., Rentfrow, P.J., Swann Jr., W.B.: A very brief measure of the big five personality domains. J. Res. Pers. 37, 504–528 (2003)
de Graaf, M., Ben Allouch, S., van Dijk, J.: Why do they refuse to use my robot? Reasons for non-use derived from a long-term home study. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2017, pp. 224–233. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020236
de Graaf, M.M., Ben Allouch, S., van Dijk, J.A.: Long-term evaluation of a social robot in real homes. Interact. Stud. 17(3), 461–490 (2016)
Haselhuhn, M.P., Schweitzer, M.E., Wood, A.M.: How implicit beliefs influence trust recovery. Psychol. Sci. 5, 645–648 (2010)
Ht, R., Mr, M., Pa, C., Pw, E., Ej, F.: Familiarity does indeed promote attraction in live interaction. J. Person. Soc. Psychol. 101(3), 557–570 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022885
Kanda, T., Sato, R., Saiwaki, N., Ishiguro, H.: A two-month field trial in an elementary school for long-term human-robot interaction. IEEE Trans. Robot. 23(5), 962–971 (2007)
Lee, A.Y.: The mere exposure effect: an uncertainty reduction explanation revisited. Person. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 27(10), 1255–1266 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672012710002
Lee, J., Moray, N.: Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics 35(10), 1243–1270 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139208967392
Ljungblad, S., Kotrbova, J., Jacobsson, M., Cramer, H., Niechwiadowicz, K.: Hospital robot at work: something alien or an intelligent colleague? In: Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW 2012, pp. 177–186. ACM, New York (2012). https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145233
Madsen, M., Gregor, S.: Measuring human-computer trust. In: Proceedings of the 11th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, pp. 6–8 (2000)
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20, 709–734 (1995)
McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C.: Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Inf. Syst. Res. 13(3), 334–359 (2001)
Nomura, T., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., Kato, K.: Measurement of negative attitudes toward robots. Interact. Stud. 7(3), 437–454 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1075/is.7.3.14nom
Paetzel, M., Perugia, G., Castellano, G.: The persistence of first impressions: the effect of repeated interactions on the perception of a social robot. In: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2020, pp. 73–82. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2020). https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374786
Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L.: How the timing and magnitude of robot errors influence peoples’ trust of robots in an emergency scenario. In: Kheddar, A., et al. (eds.) Social Robotics – ICSR 2017. LNCS, vol. 10652, pp. 42–52. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_5
Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L.: The impact of peoples’ personal dispositions and personalities on their trust of robots in an emergency scenario. Paladyn J. Behav. Robot. 9(2018). https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2018-0010
Rossi, S., Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K.: The secret life of robots: perspectivesand challenges for robot’s behaviours during non-interactive tasks. Int. J. Soc. Robot. (2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00650-z
Schilke, O., Reimann, M., Cook, K.S.: Effect of relationship experience on trust recovery following a breach. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110(38), 15236–15241 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1314857110
Syrdal, D.S., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L.: The negative attitudes towards robots scale and reactions to robot behaviour in a live human-robot interaction study. In: AISB 2009 SSAISB, Adaptive and Emergent Behaviour and Complex Systems: Proceedings of the 23rd Convention of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, pp. 109–115 (2009)
TJ, W.: Exploring the role of first impressions in rater-based assessments. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. Theor. Pract. 19(3), 409–427 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-013-9453-9
Visser, E.D., Parasuraman, R., Freedy, A., Freedy, E., Weltman, G.: A comprehensive methodology for assessing human-robot team performance for use in training and simulation. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 50(25), 2639–2643 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605002507
de Visser, E.J.: Towards a theory of longitudinal trust calibration in human–robot teams. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 12(2), 459–478 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00596-x
Voelpel, S.C., Eckhoff, R.A., Förster, J.: David against goliath? Group size and bystander effects in virtual knowledge sharing. Hum. Relat. 61(2), 271–295 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707087787
Acknowledgment
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 642667 (Safety Enables Cooperation in Uncertain Robotic Environments - SECURE). KD acknowledges funding from the Canada 150 Research Chairs Program.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L., Holthaus, P. (2020). Evaluating People’s Perceptions of Trust in a Robot in a Repeated Interactions Study. In: Wagner, A.R., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12483. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_38
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62055-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62056-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)