More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

abstract

Rethinking Trust Repair in Human-Robot Interaction

Author:

Connor EsterwoodAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '23 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Pages 432 - 436

https://doi.org/10.1145/3584931.3608919

Published: 14 October 2023 Publication History

Abstract

As robots become increasingly prevalent in work-oriented collaborations, trust has emerged as a critical factor in their acceptance and effectiveness. However, trust is dynamic and can erode when mistakes are made. Despite emerging research on trust repair in human-robot interaction, significant questions remain about identifying reliable approaches to restoring trust in robots after trust violations occur. To address this problem, my research aims to identify effective strategies for designing robots capable of trust repair in human-robot interaction (HRI) and to explore the underlying mechanisms that make these strategies successful. This paper provides an overview of the fundamental concepts and key components of the trust repair process in HRI, as well as a summary of my current published work in this area. Additionally, I discuss the research questions that will guide my future work and the potential contributions that this research could make to the field.

References

[1]

Anthony L Baker, Elizabeth K Phillips, Daniel Ullman, and Joseph R Keebler. 2018. Toward an understanding of trust repair in human-robot interaction: current research and future directions. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS) 8, 4 (2018), 1–30.

Digital Library

[2]

Michael Barnes and Florian Jentsch. 2010. Human-Robot Interactions in Future Military Operations (1st ed.). CRC Press.

[3]

Jasmin Bernotat, Friederike Eyssel, and Janik Sachse. 2017. Shape it–the influence of robot body shape on gender perception in robots. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 75–84.

[4]

Jasmin Bernotat, Friederike Eyssel, and Janik Sachse. 2019. The (fe)male robot: how robot body shape impacts first impressions and trust towards robots. International Journal of Social Robotics (2019), 1–13.

[5]

Filipa Correia, Carla Guerra, Samuel Mascarenhas, Francisco S Melo, and Ana Paiva. 2018. Exploring the impact of fault justification in human-robot trust. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. 507–513.

Digital Library

[6]

A. Costa, D. Ferrin, and C. Fulmer. 2018. Trust at work. The sage handbook of industrial, work & organizational psychology (2018), 435–467.

[7]

Ewart J. de Visser, Marieke M.M. Peeters, Malte F. Jung, Spencer Kohn, Tyler H. Shaw, Richard Pak, and Mark A Neerincx. 2020. Towards a Theory of Longitudinal Trust Calibration in Human–Robot Teams. International Journal of Social Robotics 12, 2 (2020), 459–478.

[8]

Kurt T Dirks and Daniel P Skarlicki. 2009. The relationship between being perceived as trustworthy by coworkers and individual performance. Journal of Management 35, 1 (2009), 136–157.

[9]

David Edwards. 2022. Revenues from robotics implemented in retail stores to cross $8.4 billion by 2030. https://roboticsandautomationnews.com/2022/08/25/revenues-from-robotics-implemented-in-retail-stores-to-cross-8-4-billion-by-2030/54301/

[10]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel Robert. 2021. Robots and COVID-19: Re-imagining human-robot collaborative work in terms of reducing risks to essential workers. ROBONOMICS: The Journal of the Automated Economy 1 (2021), 9–9.

[11]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel P Robert. 2020. Human Robot Team Design. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction. 251–253.

Digital Library

[12]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel P Robert. 2021. Do You Still Trust Me? Human-Robot Trust Repair Strategies. In 2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, 183–188.

[13]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel P Robert. 2022. Having The Right Attitude: How Attitude Impacts Trust Repair in Human-Robot Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2022). ACM/IEEE.

[14]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel P. Robert. 2022. A Literature Review of Trust Repair in HRI. In Proceedings of 31th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication(ROMAN ’22). IEEE Press.

Digital Library

[15]

Connor Esterwood and Lionel P Robert Jr. 2023. Three Strikes and you are out!: The impacts of multiple human–robot trust violations and repairs on robot trustworthiness. Computers in Human Behavior 142 (2023), 107658.

Digital Library

[16]

Akuadasuo Ezenyilimba, Margaret Wong, Alexander Hehr, Mustafa Demir, Alexandra Wolff, Erin Chiou, and Nancy Cooke. 2022. Impact of Transparency and Explanations on Trust and Situation Awareness in Human–Robot Teams. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making (2022), 15553434221136358.

[17]

Yaohui Guo and X. Jessie Yang. 2021. Modeling and Predicting Trust Dynamics in Human–Robot Teaming: A Bayesian Inference Approach. International Journal of Social Robotics 13 (2021).

[18]

PA Hancock, Theresa T Kessler, Alexandra D Kaplan, John C Brill, and James L Szalma. 2021. Evolving trust in robots: specification through sequential and comparative meta-analyses. Human factors 63, 7 (2021), 1196–1229.

[19]

Peter A Hancock, Deborah R Billings, Kristin E Schaefer, Jessie YC Chen, Ewart J De Visser, and Raja Parasuraman. 2011. A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human factors 53, 5 (2011), 517–527.

[20]

Wonjoon Kim, Nayoung Kim, Joseph B Lyons, and Chang S Nam. 2020. Factors affecting trust in high-vulnerability human-robot interaction contexts: A structural equation modelling approach. Applied ergonomics 85 (2020), 103056.

[21]

E. S. Kox, J. H. Kerstholt, T. F. Hueting, and P. W. De Vries. 2021. Trust repair in human-agent teams: the effectiveness of explanations and expressing regret. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 35, 2 (2021).

[22]

Roderick M Kramer and Roy J Lewicki. 2010. Repairing and enhancing trust: Approaches to reducing organizational trust deficits. Academy of Management annals 4, 1 (2010), 245–277.

[23]

Roy J Lewicki and Chad Brinsfield. 2017. Trust repair. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 4 (2017), 287–313.

[24]

Roy J Lewicki, Barbara B Bunker, 1996. Developing and maintaining trust in work relationships. Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research 114 (1996), 139.

[25]

Amelia Lucas. 2022. Why restaurant chains are investing in robots and what it means for workers. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/27/restaurant-chains-are-investing-in-robots-bringing-change-for-workers.html

[26]

Joseph B Lyons, Kevin T Wynne, Sean Mahoney, and Mark A Roebke. 2019. Trust and human-machine teaming: a qualitative study. In Artificial intelligence for the internet of everything. Elsevier, 101–116.

[27]

Roger C Mayer, James H Davis, and F David Schoorman. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review 20, 3 (1995), 709–734.

[28]

D Harrison Mcknight, Michelle Carter, Jason Bennett Thatcher, and Paul F Clay. 2011. Trust in a specific technology: An investigation of its components and measures. ACM Transactions on management information systems (TMIS) 2, 2 (2011), 1–25.

Digital Library

[29]

Brad R Rawlins. 2008. Measuring the relationship between organizational transparency and employee trust. (2008).

[30]

Lionel Robert and Sangseok You. 2013. Are you satisfied yet? Shared leadership, trust and individual satisfaction in virtual teams. In Proceedings of the iConference.

[31]

Lionel P Robert. 2020. Behavior–output control theory, trust and social loafing in virtual teams. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 4, 3 (2020), 39.

[32]

Lionel P Robert, Alan R Denis, and Yu-Ting Caisy Hung. 2009. Individual swift trust and knowledge-based trust in face-to-face and virtual team members. Journal of Management Information Systems 26, 2 (2009), 241–279.

Digital Library

[33]

Lionel P Robert Jr, Alan R Dennis, and Manju K Ahuja. 2018. Differences are different: Examining the effects of communication media on the impacts of racial and gender diversity in decision-making teams. Information Systems Research 29, 3 (2018), 525–545.

Digital Library

[34]

Paul Robinette, Ayanna M Howard, and Alan R Wagner. 2015. Timing is key for robot trust repair. In International conference on social robotics. Springer, 574–583.

Digital Library

[35]

Maurice E Schweitzer, John C Hershey, and Eric T Bradlow. 2006. Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational behavior and human decision processes 101, 1 (2006), 1–19.

[36]

Sarah Strohkorb Sebo, Priyanka Krishnamurthi, and Brian Scassellati. 2019. “I Don’t Believe You”: Investigating the Effects of Robot Trust Violation and Repair. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE, 57–65.

[37]

Kinshuk Sharma, F. David Schoorman, and Gary A. Ballinger. 2022. How Can It Be Made Right Again? A Review of Trust Repair Research. Journal of Management 0, 0 (2022), 01492063221089897.

[38]

L Turmelle. 2020. Don’t Worry, Stop and Shop Cleans Marty.

[39]

Eva Wiese, Tyler Shaw, Daniel Lofaro, and Carryl Baldwin. 2017. Designing artificial agents as social companions. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 61. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 1604–1608.

[40]

X. Jessie Yang, Yaohui Guo, and Christopher Schemanske. 2023. From Trust to Trust Dynamics: Combining Empirical and Computational Approaches to Model and Predict Trust Dynamics in Human-Autonomy Interaction. In Human-Automation Interaction: Transportation, Vincent G. Duffy, Steven J. Landry, John D. Lee, and Neville A. Stanton (Eds.). 253–265.

[41]

Sangseok You and Lionel Robert. 2018. Teaming up with robots: An IMOI (inputs-mediators-outputs-inputs) framework of human-robot teamwork. You, S. and Robert, LP (2017). Teaming Up with Robots: An IMOI (Inputs-Mediators-Outputs-Inputs) Framework of Human-Robot Teamwork, International Journal of Robotic Engineering,(IJRE) 2, 3 (2018).

[42]

Sangseok You and Lionel P Robert Jr. 2018. Emotional Attachment, Performance, and Viability in Teams Collaborating with Embodied Physical Action (EPA) Robots. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 19, 5 (2018), 377–407.

[43]

Xinyi Zhang. 2021. “Sorry, It Was My Fault”: Repairing Trust in Human-Robot Interactions. Master’s thesis. University of Oklahoma.

Cited By

Pietras EUlfert-Blank ABorzone GKramberger AKrüger NBodenhagen L(2024)The Effects of Framing and Apology in HRI in Manufacturing2024 IEEE 20th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE)10.1109/CASE59546.2024.10711703(4005-4011)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/CASE59546.2024.10711703

Index Terms

Rethinking Trust Repair in Human-Robot Interaction
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. HCI theory, concepts and models

Recommendations

Toward an Understanding of Trust Repair in Human-Robot Interaction: Current Research and Future Directions

Gone are the days of robots solely operating in isolation, without direct interaction with people. Rather, robots are increasingly being deployed in environments and roles that require complex social interaction with humans. The implementation of human-...
"I don't believe you": investigating the effects of robot trust violation and repair
HRI '19: Proceedings of the 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

When a robot breaks a person's trust by making a mistake or failing, continued interaction will depend heavily on how the robot repairs the trust that was broken. Prior work in psychology has demonstrated that both the trust violation framing and the ...
Human-Robot Trust: Just a Button Press Away
HRI '17: Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction

Many of the benefits promised by human-robot interaction require successful continued interaction between a human and a robot; trust is a key component of such interaction. We investigate whether having a person "n the loop" with a robot---i.e., the ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CSCW '23 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 2023

596 pages

ISBN:9798400701290

DOI:10.1145/3584931

Editors:
Casey Fiesler
University of Colorado Boulder, USA
,
Loren Terveen
University of Minnesota, USA
,
Morgan Ames
University of California, Berkeley, USA
,
Susan Fussell
Cornell University, USA
,
Eric Gilbert
University of Michigan, USA
,
Vera Liao
Microsoft Research Montreal, Canada
,
Xiaojuan Ma
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
,
Xinru Page
Brigham Young University, USA
,
Mark Rouncefield
Lancaster University, UK
,
Vivek Singh
Rutgers University, USA
,
Pamela Wisniewski
Vanderbilt University, USA

Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 October 2023

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Abstract
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

CSCW '23

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW '23: Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 14 - 18, 2023

MN, Minneapolis, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 18 - 22, 2025

Bergen , Norway

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

1
Total Citations
View Citations
154
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)107
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

Reflects downloads up to 30 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Pietras EUlfert-Blank ABorzone GKramberger AKrüger NBodenhagen L(2024)The Effects of Framing and Apology in HRI in Manufacturing2024 IEEE 20th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE)10.1109/CASE59546.2024.10711703(4005-4011)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/CASE59546.2024.10711703

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents