A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction

Human Factors

Volumn 53, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 517-527

  Hancock, Peter A ^a   Billings, Deborah R ^a   Schaefer, Kristin E ^a   Chen, Jessie Y C ^b   De Visser, Ewart J ^c   Parasuraman, Raja ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

^b U S ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^c GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

human robot team; robotics; trust; trust development

Indexed keywords

CORRELATIONAL ANALYSIS; EFFECT SIZE; EMPIRICAL FOUNDATIONS; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTIC; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS; EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS; HUMAN-ROBOT-TEAM; META-ANALYSIS; PERCEIVED TRUSTS; QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATES; RESEARCH NEEDS; ROBOT DESIGNS; SELECTION CRITERIA; TRUST; TRUST DEVELOPMENT;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MACHINE DESIGN; MAN MACHINE SYSTEMS; ROBOTICS;

HUMAN ROBOT INTERACTION;

ARTICLE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; META ANALYSIS; ROBOTICS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; TRUST;

HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; ROBOTICS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; TRUST;

EID: 80052999278     PISSN: 00187208     EISSN: 15478181     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0018720811417254     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Adams B. D., Bruyn L. E., Houde S., Angelopoulos P. Trust in automated systems literature review. Toronto, Canada: Defence Research and Development Canada ; 2003 :
2. Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. 2001 ). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Washington, DC: Author ; 2001 :
3. Bainbridge W. A., Hart J., Kim E. S., Scassellati B.. The effect of presence on human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Community ; 2008 ; 2008. 701.
4. Biros D. P., Daly M., Gunsch G.. The influence of task load and automation trust on deception detection. Group Decision and Negotiation. 2004 ; 13: 173-189
5. Chang L. J., Doll B. B., van 't Wout M., Frank M. J., Sanfey A. G.. Seeing is believing: Trustworthiness as a dynamic belief. Cognitive Psychology. 2010 ; 61: 87-105
6. Chen J. Y. C., Barnes M. J., Harper-Sciarini M.. Supervisory control of multiple robots: Human-performance issues and user-interface design. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and Reviews. 2010 ; 41: 435-454
7. Chen J. Y. C., Haas E. C., Barnes M. J.. Human performance issues and user interface design for teleoperated robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and Reviews. 2007 ; 37: 1231-1245
8. Chen J. Y. C., Terrence P. I.. Effects of imperfect automation and individual differences on concurrent performance of military and robotics tasks in a simulated multitasking environment. Ergonomics. 2009 ; 52: 907-920
9. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 1988 ). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum ; 1988 :
10. De Ruyter B., Saini P., Markopoulous P., van Breeman A.. Assessing the effects of building social intelligence in robotic interface in the home. Interacting With Computers. 2005 ; 17: 522-541
11. de Visser E. J., Parasuraman R., Freedy A., Freedy E., Weltman G.. A comprehensive methodology for assessing human-robot team performance for use in training and simulation. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ; 2006 ; 2006. 2639.
12. Dzindolet M. T., Peterson S. A., Pomranky R. A., Pierce L. G., Beck H. P.. The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2003 ; 58: 697-718
13. Epley N., Waytz A., Cacioppo J. T.. On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review. 2007 ; 114: 864-886
14. Evers V., Maldanado H., Brodecki T., Hinds P.. Relational vs. group self-construal: Untangling the role of national culture in HRI. Proceedings in the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction ; 2008 ; 2008. 255.
15. Freedy A., de Visser E., Weltman G., Coeyman N.. Measurement of trust in human-robot collaboration. Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Collaborative Technologies and Systems ; 2007 ; 2007. 106.
16. GarreauJ. (2007, May6). Bots on the ground: In the field of battle (or even above it), robots are a soldier's best friend. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com
17. GlionnaJ. M.NaganoY. (2011, May8). Japan looks abroad for high-tech help at Fukushima plant. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes. com/2011/may/08/world/la-fg-japan-robots-20110508
18. Goodrich M. A., Crandall J. W., Stimpson J... Paper presented at the 2003 AAAI Spring Symposium on Human Interaction with Autonomous Systems in Complex Environments ; Palo Alto, CA ;..
19. Graf B., Hans M., Schraft R. D.. Care-O-Bot II development of a next generation robotic home assistant. Autonomous Robots. 2004 ; 16: 193-205
20. Groom V., Nass C.. Can robots be teammates? Benchmarks in human-robot teams. Interaction Studies. 2007 ; 8: 483-500
21. Guizzo E., Goldstein H.. The rise of the body bots [robotic exoskeletons]. IEEE Spectrum. 2005 ; 42 (10). 50-56
22. Hancock P. A.. Effects of control order, augmented feedback, input device and practice on tracking performance and perceived workload. Ergonomics. 1996 ; 39: 1146-1162
23. Hancock P. A., Hancock G. M., Warm J. S.. Individuation: The N = 1 revolution. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomic Science. 2009 ; 10: 481-488
24. Hancock P. A., Warm J. S.. A dynamic model of stress and sustained attention. Human Factors. 1989 ; 31: 519-537
25. Hedges L., Olkin I. Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press ; 1985 :
26. Heerink M., Krose B., Evers V., Wielinga B.. Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: The Almere model. International Journal of Social Robots. 2010 ; 2: 361-375
27. Hinds P. J., Roberts T. L., Jones H.. Whose job is it anyway? A study of human-robot interaction in a collaborative task. Human-Computer Interaction. 2004 ; 19: 151-181
28. Hunter J. E., Schmidt F. L. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting for error and bias in research findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage ; 2004 :
29. Keri S., Kiss I., Kelemen O.. Sharing secrets: Oxytocin and trust in schizophrenia. Social Neuroscience. 2009 ; 4: 287-293
30. Keyes B., Micire M., Drury J. L., Yanco H. A. Human-robot interaction. Chugo D., ed. Rijeka, Croatia: InTech ; 2010: 183-202.
31. KiddC. D. (2003). Sociable robots: The role of presence and task in human-robot interaction. (Master's thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
32. Kidd C. D., Breazeal C.. Effect of a robot on user perception. Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems ; 2004 ; 2004. 3559.
33. Kiesler S., Powers A., Fussell S. R., Torry C.. Anthropomorphic interactions with a robot and robot-like agents. Social Cognition. 2008 ; 26: 169-181
34. Lee J. D., See K. A.. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors. 2004 ; 46: 50-80
35. Li D., Rau P., Li Y.. A cross-cultural study: Effect of robot appearance and task. International Journal of Social Robots. 2010 ; 2: 175-186
36. Lipsey M. W., Wilson D. B. Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage ; 2001 :
37. Looije R., Neerinex M. A., Cnossen F.. Persuasive robotic assistant for health self-management of older adults: Design and evaluation of social behaviors. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2010 ; 68: 386-397
38. Madhavan P., Wiegmann D. A.. Similarities and differences between human-human and human-automation trust: An integrative review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2007 ; 8: 277-301
39. Moravec H. Mind children: The future of robot and human intelligence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press ; 1988 :
40. Morris S. B., DeShon R. P.. Combining effect size estimates in meta-analysis with repeated measures and independent groups designs. Psychological Methods. 2002 ; 7: 105-125
41. Murphy R. R., Riddle D., Rasmussen E.. Robot-assisted medical reachback: A survey of how medical personnel expect to interact with rescue robots. Proceedings of the 13th Annual IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN 2004) ; 2004 ; 2004. 301.
42. Mutlu B., Yamaoka F., Kanda T., Ishiguro H., Hagita N.. Nonverbal leakage in robots: Communication of intentions through seemingly unintentional behavior. Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction ; 2009 ; 2009. 69.
43. Natsoulas T.. What are perceptual reports about?. Psychological Bulletin. 1967 ; 67: 249-272
44. Ogreten S., Lackey S., Nicholson D... Paper presented at the 2010 International Symposium on Collaborative Technology Systems ; Chicago, IL ;..
45. Parasuraman R., Cosenzo K. A., de Visser E.. Adaptive automation for human supervision of multiple uninhabited vehicles: Effects on change detection, situation awareness, and mental workload. Military Psychology. 2009 ; 21: 270-297
46. Parasuraman R., Manzey D.. Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors. 2010 ; 52: 381-410
47. Parasuraman R., Riley V.. Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors. 1997 ; 39: 230-253
48. Parasuraman R., Sheridan T., Wickens C.. Situation awareness, mental workload, and trust in automation: Viable, empirically supported cognitive engineering constructs. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making. 2008 ; 2: 140-160
49. Park E., Jenkins Q., Jiang X... Paper presented at the 7th JFPS International Symposium on Fluid Power ; Toyama, Japan ;..
50. Powers A., Kiesler S., Fussell S., Torrey C.. Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Robot Interaction ; 2007 ; 2007. 145.
51. Rau P. L., Li Y., Li D.. Effects of communication style and culture on ability to accept recommendations from robots. Computers in Human Behavior. 2009 ; 25: 587-595
52. RossJ. M. (2008). Moderators of trust and reliance across multiple decision aids (Doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando.
53. Scopelliti M., Giuliani M. V., Fornara F.. Robots in a domestic setting: A psychological approach. Universal Access in the Information Society. 2005 ; 4: 146-155
54. Sheridan T. B. Humans and automation: System design and research issues. Santa Monica, CA: Wiley ; 2002 :
55. Sheridan T. B., Parasuraman R.. Human-automation interaction. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics. 2006 ; 1: 89-129
56. Steinfeld A., Fong T., Kaber D., Lewis M., Scholtz J., Schultz A., Goodrich M.. Common metrics for human-robot interaction. Proceedings of 2006 ACM Conference on Human-Robot Interaction ; 2006 ; 2006. 33.
57. Tenney Y. J., Rogers W. H., Pew R. W.. Pilot opinions of cockpit automation issues. International Journal of Aviation Psychology. 1998 ; 8: 103-120
58. Tsui K. M., Desai M., Yanco H. A.. Considering the bystander's perspective for indirect human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction ; 2010 ; 2010. 129.
59. Tsui K. M., Yanco H. A.. Assistive, surgical, and rehabilitation robots from the perspective of medical and healthcare professionals. ; 2007 ; 2007. 34.
60. Wang L., Rau P. L., Evers V., Robinson B. K., Hinds P.. When in Rome: The role of culture and context in adherence to robot recommendations. Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction ; 2010 ; 2010. 359.
61. Yanco H. A.. Development and testing of a robotic wheelchair system for outdoor navigation. Proceedings of the 2001 Conference of the Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America ; 2001 ; 2001..