Human Reactions to Incorrect Answers from Robots (2403.14293v1)
Abstract: As robots grow more and more integrated into numerous industries, it is critical to comprehend how humans respond to their failures. This paper systematically studies how trust dynamics and system design are affected by human responses to robot failures. The three-stage survey used in the study provides a thorough understanding of human-robot interactions. While the second stage concentrates on interaction details, such as robot precision and error acknowledgment, the first stage collects demographic data and initial levels of trust. In the last phase, participants' perceptions are examined after the encounter, and trust dynamics, forgiveness, and propensity to suggest robotic technologies are evaluated. Results show that participants' trust in robotic technologies increased significantly when robots acknowledged their errors or limitations to participants and their willingness to suggest robots for activities in the future points to a favorable change in perception, emphasizing the role that direct engagement has in influencing trust dynamics. By providing useful advice for creating more sympathetic, responsive, and reliable robotic systems, the study advances the science of human-robot interaction and promotes a wider adoption of robotic technologies.
- H. Su, W. Qi, J. Chen, C. Yang, J. Sandoval, and M. A. Laribi, “Recent advancements in multimodal human–robot interaction,” Frontiers in Neurorobotics, vol. 17, 2023.
- A. M. Aroyo, J. de Bruyne, O. Dheu, E. Fosch-Villaronga, A. Gudkov, H. Hoch, S. Jones, C. Lutz, H. Sætra, M. Solberg, and A. Tamò-Larrieux, “Overtrusting robots: Setting a research agenda to mitigate overtrust in automation,” Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 423–436, 2021.
- N. Mirnig, G. Stollnberger, M. Miksch, S. Stadler, M. Giuliani, and M. Tscheligi, “To err is robot: How humans assess and act toward an erroneous social robot,” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 4, 2017.
- A. Weidemann and N. Rußwinkel, “The role of frustration in human–robot interaction – what is needed for a successful collaboration?,” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021.
- D. Kontogiorgos, M. Tran, J. Gustafson, and M. Soleymani, “A systematic cross-corpus analysis of human reactions to robot conversational failures,” ICMI ’21: Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, 2021.
- H. Yasuda and M. Matsumoto, “Psychological impact on human when a robot makes mistakes,” in Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration, pp. 335–339, 2013.
- M. L. Traeger, “Robots that admit mistakes foster better conversation in humans.” Yale News, March 2020.
- R. Salek Shahrezaie, B. Akter Anima, and D. Feil-Seifer, “Human and robot bonding: A study on implying homophily in hri,” UNR, 2020.
- C. J. Hayes, M. Moosaei, and L. D. Riek, “Exploring implicit human responses to robot mistakes in a learning from demonstration task,” in 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), IEEE, Aug. 2016.
- M. Salem, G. Lakatos, F. Amirabdollahian, and K. Dautenhahn, “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, HRI ’15, (New York, NY, USA), p. 141–148, Association for Computing Machinery, 2015.
- M. Stiber and C.-M. Huang, “Not all errors are created equal: Exploring human responses to robot errors with varying severity,” in Companion Publication of the 2020 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, ICMI ’20 Companion, (New York, NY, USA), p. 97–101, Association for Computing Machinery, 2021.
- “Nao configuaration,” 2023.
- R. Bevans, “One-way anova — when and how to use it (with examples),” March 2020.