Being transparent about transparency: A model for human-robot interaction

AAAI Spring Symposium - Technical Report

Volumn SS-13-07, Issue , 2013, Pages 48-53

  Lyons, Joseph B ^a  

^a AIR FORCE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DESIGN IMPLICATIONS; DISPLAY DESIGNS; HUMAN-ROBOT INTERFACE; KEY ELEMENTS; SOCIAL DESIGNS; THROUGH THE LENS; TRANSPARENCY DOMAINS;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; MAN MACHINE SYSTEMS; TRANSPARENCY;

HUMAN ROBOT INTERACTION;

EID: 84883392815     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Arkin, R.C. 2009. Governing lethal behavior in autonomous robots. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
2. Desteno, D.; Breazeal, C.; Frank, R.; Pizarro, D.; Baumann, J.; Dickens, L.; and Lee, J. 2012. Detecting the trustworthiness of novel partners in economic exchanges. Psychological Science. In press.
3. Dzindolet, M.T.; Peterson, S.A.; Pomranky, R.A.; Pierce, L.G.; and Beck, H.P. 2003. The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 58: 697-718.
4. Fischer, K. 2011. How people talk with robots: Designing dialogue to reduce user uncertainty. Al Magazine, 31-38.
5. Goetz, J.; Kiesler, S.; & Powers, A. 2003. Matching robot appearance and behavior to tasks to improve human-robot cooperation. Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (55-60). Millbrae, CA.
6. Inagaki, T. 2008. Smart collaboration between humans and machines based on mutual understanding. Annual Reviews in Control. 253-261.
7. th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 33-40.
8. th International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN06). 80-85. Hatfield, UK: IEEE.
9. Lee, J.D.; and See, K.A. 2004. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors. 46: 50-80.
10. Lyons, J.B.; and Stokes, C.K. 2012. Human-human reliance in the context of automation. Human Factors. 54(1): 112-121.
11. Muir, B.M. 1994. Trust in automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics. 37(11): 1905-1922.
12. Pak, R.; Fink, N.; Price, M.; Bass, B.; and Sturre, L. 2012. Decision support aids with anthropomorphic characteristics influence trust and performance in younger and older adults. Ergonomics. 1-14.
13. Parasuraman, R.; and Miller, C. 2004. Trust and etiquette in high-criticality automated systems. Communications of the ACM. 47: 51-55.
14. Parasuraman, R.; Sheridan, T.B.; and Wickens, C.D. 2000. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 30: 573-583.
15. Rovira, E.; McGarry, K; and Parasuraman, R. 2007. Effects of imperfect automation on decision making in a simulated command and control task. Human Factors, 49(1): 76-87.
16. Salas, E.; Cooke, N.J.; and Rosen, M.A. 2008. On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors. 50(3): 540-547.
17. Stubbs, K.; Wettergreen, D.; and Hinds, P.J. 2007. Autonomy and common ground in human-robot interaction: A field study. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 42-50.
18. Wang, L.; Jamieson, G.A.; and Hollands, J.G. 2009. Trust and reliance on an automated combat identification system. Human Factors. 51:281-291.
19. th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. Toyama, Japan.