CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 59Social Robot Interaction and HRIHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyAI in Service Interactions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of blame on trust in human robot interaction

Kaniarasu, Poornima, Steinfeld, Aaron M.·2014·The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication
DOI 10.1109/roman.2014.6926359
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Trust in automation is a crucial ingredient for successful human robot interaction. Both human related and robot related factors influence the user's trust on the robot and it is challenging to characterize each of these factors and study how they affect human trust. In this study we try to understand how blame attribution after an error impacts user trust. Three different robot personalities were implemented, each assigning blame to either of the user, the robot itself, or the human-robot team. Our study results confirm that blame attribution impacts human trust in robots.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/roman.2014.6926359

Cites

4 of 4 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. 10.1109/HRI.2013.6483548 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.1109/HRI.2010.5453192 · DOI
  3. park, 2011, The Effects of a Robot Instructor's Positive vs. Negative Feedbacks on Attraction and Acceptance towards the Robot in Classroom, Social Robotics Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7072, 135, 10.1007/978-3-642-25504-5_14 · DOI
  4. 10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314398 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1006/ijhc.1994.1007 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1145/1957656.1957778 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kaniarasu, P., & Steinfeld, A. M.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
ORCID
Steinfeld, Aaron M.
Venue
The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2014-08
Pages
850-855
ISSN
1944-9437 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1109/roman.2014.6926359
OpenAlex
W2017742123
Cited by
59
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2
FWCI
2.69
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE RO-MAN (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
Keywords
trust in robots, blame attribution, human-robot interaction, trust in automation, robot personality, error attribution, user trust

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