Abstract
Trust is a key factor in human users’ acceptance of robots in a home or human oriented environment. Humans should be able to trust that they can safely interact with their robot. Robots will sometimes make errors, due to mechanical or functional failures. It is therefore important that a domestic robot should have acceptable interactive behaviours when exhibiting and recovering from an error situation. In order to define these behaviours, it is firstly necessary to consider that errors can have different degrees of consequences. We hypothesise that the severity of the consequences and the timing of a robot’s different types of erroneous behaviours during an interaction may have different impacts on users’ attitudes towards a domestic robot. In this study we used an interactive storyboard presenting ten different scenarios in which a robot performed different tasks under five different conditions. Each condition included the ten different tasks performed by the robot, either correctly, or with small or big errors. The conditions with errors were complemented with four correct behaviours. At the end of each experimental condition, participants were presented with an emergency scenario to evaluate their current trust in the robot. We conclude that there is correlation between the magnitude of an error performed by the robot and the corresponding loss of trust of the human in the robot.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amazon mechanical turk https://www.mturk.com
Agresti, A.: Categorical Data Analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley-Interscience, Chichester, New York (2002)
Bainbridge, W.A., Hart, J.W., Kim, E.S., Scassellati, B.: The benefits of interactions with physically present robots over video-displayed agents. Int. J. Social Robot. 3(1), 41–52 (2011)
Billings, D.: Computer poker. University of Alberta M.Sc. thesis (1995)
Booth, S., Tompkin, J., Pfister, H., Waldo, J., Gajos, K., Nagpal, R.: Piggybacking robots: human-robot overtrust in university dormitory security, pp. 426–434. ACM (2017)
Cameron, D., Aitken, J.M., Collins, E.C., Boorman, L., Chua, A., Fernando, S., McAree, O., Martinez-Hernandez, U., Law, J.: Framing factors: the importance of context and the individual in understanding trust in human-robot interaction. In: International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (2015)
Desai, M., Kaniarasu, P., Medvedev, M., Steinfeld, A., Yanco, H.: Impact of robot failures and feedback on real-time trust. In: ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 251–258 (2013)
Desai, M., Medvedev, M., Vázquez, M., McSheehy, S., Gadea-Omelchenko, S., Bruggeman, C., Steinfeld, A., Yanco, H.: Effects of changing reliability on trust of robot systems. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction, HRI 2012, pp. 73–80 (2012)
Deutsch, M.: Trust and suspicion. J. Confl. Resolut. 2, 265–279 (1958)
Golder, S., Donath, J.: Hiding and revealing in online poker games, pp. 370–373 (2004)
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)
Hancock, P.A., Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y.C., de Visser, E.J., Parasuraman, R.: A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 53(5), 517–527 (2011)
Haselhuhn, M.P., Schweitzer, M.E., Wood, A.M.: How implicit beliefs influence trust recovery. Psychol. Sci. 5, 645–648 (2010)
Koay, K.L., Syrdal, D.S., Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K.: Living with robots: investigating the habituation effect in participants’ preferences during a longitudinal human-robot interaction study. In: Proceedings - IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 564–569 (2007)
Kramer, R.M., Carnevale, P.J.: Trust and intergroup negotiation. In: Brown, R., Gaertner, S.L. (eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes. Blackwell, Boston (2003)
Lee, J.D., See, K.A.: Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 46(1), 50–80 (2004)
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.: Propensity to trust scale 13, 339–359 (2001). http://highered.mheducation.com/sites/0073381225/student/view0/chapter7/self-assessment/74.html
Muir, B.M., Moray, N.: Trust in automation: Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics 39, 429–460 (1996)
Robinette, P., Howard, A.M., Wagner, A.R.: Timing is key for robot trust repair. Social Robotics. LNCS, vol. 9388, pp. 574–583. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_57
Robinette, P., Li, W., Allen, R., Howard, A.M., Wagner, A.R.: Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios. In: Proceeding of the Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interation, HRI 2016, pp. 101–108. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2016)
Ross, J.M.: Moderators of trust and reliance across multiple decision aids (Doctoral dissertation), University of Central Florida, Orlando (2008)
Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L.: Human perceptions of the severity of domestic robot errors. In: Accepted for the Ninth International Conference on Social Robotics, ICSR 2017, 22–24th November 2017, Tsukuba, Japan (2017)
Salem, M., Dautenhahn, K.: Evaluating trust and safety in HRI: practical issues and ethical challenges. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2015): Workshop on the Emerging Policy and Ethics of Human-Robot Interaction (2015)
Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., Dautenhahn, K.: Would you trust a (faulty) robot? Effects of error, task type and personality on human-robot cooperation and trust. In: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 141–148 (2015)
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)
Simpson, J.A.: Foundations of interpersonal trust. In: Kruglanski, A.W., Higgins, E.T. (eds.) Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, pp. 587–607. Guilford, New York (2007)
Simpson, J.A.: Psychological foundations of trust. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 16(5), 264–268 (2007)
Slovic, P.: Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal. 13, 675–682 (2000)
Wang, N., Pynadath, D.V., Unnikrishnan, K.V., Shankar, S., Merchant, C.: Intelligent agents for virtual simulation of human-robot interaction. In: Shumaker, R., Lackey, S. (eds.) VAMR 2015. LNCS, vol. 9179, pp. 228–239. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21067-4_24
Yu, K., Berkovsky, S., Taib, R., Conway, D., Zhou, J., Chen, F.: User trust dynamics: an investigation driven by differences in system performance, vol. 126745, pp. 307–317. ACM (2017)
Acknowledgments
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).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Rossi, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K.L., Walters, M.L. (2017). How the Timing and Magnitude of Robot Errors Influence Peoples’ Trust of Robots in an Emergency Scenario. In: Kheddar, A., et al. Social Robotics. ICSR 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10652. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70021-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70022-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)