CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 11

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

"The robot may not notice my discomfort" – Examining the Experience of Vulnerability for Trust in Human-Robot Interaction

Hannibal, Glenda, Weiss, Astrid, Charisi, Vicky·2021·2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)
DOI 10.1109/ro-man50785.2021.9515513
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Ensuring trust in human-robot interaction (HRI) is considered essential for widespread use of robots in society and everyday life. While the majority of studies use game-based and high-risk scenarios with low familiarity to gain a deeper understanding of human trust in robots, scenarios with more subtle trust violations that could happen in everyday life situations are less often considered. In this paper, we present a theory-driven approach to studying the situated trust in HRI by focusing on the experience of vulnerability. Focusing on vulnerability not only challenges previous work on trust in HRI from a theoretical perspective, but is also useful for guiding empirical investigations. As a first proof-of-concept study, we conducted an interactive online survey that demonstrates that it is possible to measure human experience of vulnerability in the ordinary, mundane, and familiar situation of clothes shopping. We conclude that the inclusion of subtle trust violation scenarios occurring in the everyday life situation of clothes shopping enables a better understanding of situated trust in HRI, which is of special importance when considering more near-future applications of robots.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/ro-man50785.2021.9515513

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 8 references

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. zörner, 2021, An Immersive Investment Game to Study Human-Robot Trust, Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8, 1, 10.3389/frobt.2021.644529 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00020-3 · DOI · Paper page
  3. paridon, 2006, The income effect in Personal Shopping Values, Consumer Self-confidence, and Information Sharing (Word of Mounth Communication) Research, Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 10, 107
  4. 10.1086/209376 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1075/is.7.3.14nom · DOI
  6. 10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745167 · DOI
  7. miles, 2014, Qualitative Data Analysis A Sourcebook of New Methods
  8. 10.1007/s10514-018-9771-0 · DOI
  9. 10.1080/07370020903586662 · DOI · Paper page
  10. ullman, 2018, What Does it Mean to Trust a Robot? Steps Toward a Multidimensional Measure of Trust, Proceedings of 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 263
  11. 10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745165 · DOI
  12. 10.1145/2909824.3020211 · DOI
  13. sebo, 2019, ’I Don’t Believe You’: Investigating the Effects of Robot Trust Violation and Repair, ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-robot Interaction, 57
  14. 10.1007/s10676-011-9279-1 · DOI
  15. 10.1109/HRI.2019.8673090 · DOI
  16. 10.1177/001872676001300202 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/j.sheji.2018.03.001 · DOI
  18. coeckelbergh, 2013, Human being risk Enhancement technology and the evaluation of vulnerability transformations
  19. lewis, 2018, The Role of Trust in Human-Robot Interaction, Foundations of Trusted Autonomy (Studies in Systems Decision and Control, 177, 135, 10.1007/978-3-319-64816-3_8 · DOI
  20. 10.1145/3171221.3171264 · DOI · Paper page
  21. möllering, 2006, Trust Reason Routine Reflexivity
  22. 10.1177/1071181311551298 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s12369-012-0144-0 · DOI
  24. 10.1007/978-1-4899-7668-0_10 · DOI
  25. 10.1109/MIS.2013.24 · DOI
  26. 10.1007/978-3-319-41959-6_29 · DOI
  27. 10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.5465/AMR.1995.9508080335 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1109/ROMAN.2008.4600725 · DOI
  30. misztal, 2011, The Challenges of Vulnerability In Search of Strategies for a Less Vulnerable Social Life
  31. 10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_38 · DOI
  32. martelaro, 2016, Tell me more: Designing HRI to encourage more trust, disclosure, and companionship, ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-robot Interaction, 181
  33. 10.1145/2696454.2696497 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926359 · DOI · Paper page
  35. luhmann, 1988, Familiarity, Confidence, Trust: Problems and Alternatives, Trust Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, 94
  36. 10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_58 · DOI
  37. 10.1145/3171221.3171275 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 11

Metadata

Authors
Hannibal, G., Weiss, A., & Charisi, V.
Affiliations
  • TU Wien,Institute of Visual Computing and Human-Centered Technology
  • The EU Commission,Joint Research Center (JRC)
Venue
2021 30th IEEE International Conference on Robot & Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2021-08-08
Pages
704-711
DOI
10.1109/ro-man50785.2021.9515513
Cited by
11
References
8
Licence

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