The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human–robot teams
Abstract
The team has become a popular model to organize joint human–robot behavior. Robot teammates are designed with high-levels of autonomy and well-developed coordination skills to aid humans in unpredictable environments. In this paper, we challenge the assumption that robots will succeed as teammates alongside humans. Drawing from the literature on human teams, we evaluate robots’ potential to meet the requirements of successful teammates. We argue that lacking humanlike mental models and a sense of self, robots may prove untrustworthy and will be rejected from human teams. Benchmarks for evaluating human–robot teams are included, as are guidelines for defining alternative structures for human–robot groups.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A Meta-Analysis of Factors Affecting Trust in Human-Robot Interaction
Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2011) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720811417254 · Cited by 2,051
Makarius, E. E., Mukherjee, D., Fox, J. D., & Fox, A. K. (2020) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.07.045 · Cited by 780
Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature
O’Neill, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B. (2022) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720820960865 · Cited by 695
Building a Stronger CASA: Extending the Computers Are Social Actors Paradigm
Gambino, A., Fox, J., & Ratan, R. (2020) · Human-Machine Communication · doi:10.30658/hmc.1.5 · Cited by 626
“Removing this anthropocentric bias from CASA should allow researchers a means to avert their own human-centric biases and avoid the pitfall highlighted by Groom and Nass (2007): “While trying to make robots human, researchers have sometimes overlooked what makes robots special” (p. 494).”
BackgroundAttachment and trust in artificial intelligence
Gillath, O., Ai, T., Branicky, M. S., Keshmiri, S., Davison, R. B., & Spaulding, R. (2021) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106607 · Cited by 448
Metadata
- Authors
- Groom, V., & Nass, C.
- Venue
- Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems
- Publisher
- John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Published
- 2007-10-16
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 483-500
- ISSN
- 1572-0373 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-0381
- OpenAlex
- W2035928776
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human–robot teams. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1075/is.8.3.10gro
- The paper
- Groom, V., & Nass, C. (2007). Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human–robot teams. Interaction Studies. Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.8.3.10gro
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
