Assistive robotics is a rapidly progressing field of study that contains facets yet to be fully understood. Here we look at the effect of robot form on user’s level of trust placed on the robot. Form-based trust was evaluated in this study by comparing participant trust ratings based on four robot designs: Lego Mindstorm, Keepon, Sphero and Ozzy. The first view of the robot and the interactions with the robots were examined with pre and post measurements of trust. Sphero and Lego received consistently higher trust ratings than Keepon and Ozzy. Pre-post measures reveal a difference between the initial measure of trust based on form, and the second measure of trust based on the observation of robot function.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdmoniH.HayesB.Feil-SeiferD.UllmanD.ScassellatiB. Dancing With Myself: The effect of majority group size on perceptions of majority and minority robot group members.
2.
BartneckC.KandaT.MubinO.MahmudA.Al. (2009). Does the Design of a Robot Influence Its Animacy and Perceived Intelligence?, 195–204. doi:10.1007/s12369-009-0013-7
3.
BernsK.MehdiS. A. (2010). Use of an autonomous mobile robot for elderly care. Advanced Technologies for Enhancing Quality of Life (AT-EQUAL), 121-126.
4.
BroadbentE.StaffordR.MacdonaldB. (2009). Acceptance of Healthcare Robots for the Older Population: Review and Future Directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 319-330.
5.
DesaiM.StubbsK.SteinfeldA.YancoH. (2009).Creating Trustworthy Robots: Lessons and Inspirations from Automated Systems.
6.
FukudaH.UedaK. (2010). Interaction with a moving object affects one’s perception of its animacy. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2(2), 187-193.
7.
DonnellanM. B.OswaldF. L.BairdB. M.LucasR. E. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 192–203. http://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.18.2.192
8.
FongT. W.NourbakhshI.DautenhahnK. (2002). A survey of socially interactive robots: Concepts, Design and Applications. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. Retrieved from http://uhra.herts.ac.uk/handle/2299/3821
9.
ForbesA.RogerD. (1999). Stress, social support and fear of disclosure. British Journal of Health Psychology, 4(2), 165–179. http://doi.org/10.1348/135910799168551
10.
GoetzJ.KieslerS.PowersA. (2003). Matching Robot Appearance and Behavior to Tasks to Improve Human- Robot Cooperation University of California,. In The 12th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 55–60). IEEE.
11.
JianJ.BisantzA. M.DruryC. G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53–71.
12.
KozimaH.NakagawaC. (2006, March). Social robots for children: Practice in communication-care. In Advanced Motion Control, 2006. 9th IEEE International Workshop on (pp. 768-773). IEEE.
13.
KozimaH.MichalowskiM. P.NakagawaC. (2009). Keepon: A playful robot for research, therapy, and entertainment. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 3–18. doi:10.1007/s12369-008-0009-8
14.
LiY. M.YehY. S. (2010). Increasing trust in mobile commerce through design aesthetics. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 673–684. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.01.004
15.
MichalowskiM. P.SabanovicS.MichelP. (2006, September). Roillo: Creating a social robot for playrooms. In Proceedings of the 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO- MAN 2006) (pp. 587-592).
16.
MichalowskiM. P.SabanovicS.KozimaH. (2007, March). A dancing robot for rhythmic social interaction. In Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on (pp. 89-96). IEEE.
17.
MontemerloM.PineauJ.RoyN.ThrunS.VermaV. (2002). Experiences with a mobile robotic guide for the elderly. In AAAI-02 Proceedings (pp. 587–592). AAAI.
18.
NomuraT.SuzukiT.KandaT.KatoK. (2006). Altered attitudes of people toward robots: Investigation through the Negative Attitudes toward Robots Scale. Proc. AAAI-06 Workshop on Human Implications of Human-Robot Interaction, (Chaplin 1991), 29–35. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Workshops/2006/WS-06-09/WS06-09-006.pdf
19.
RiekL. D. (2012). Wizard of oz studies in hri: a systematic review and new reporting guidelines. Journal of Human- Robot Interaction, 1(1).
SullivanL. H. (1896). The tall office building artistically considered. Lippincott’s Magazine, 57(3), 406.
24.
TewariA.PeabodyJ.SarleR.BalakrishnanG.HemalA.ShrivastavaA.MenonM. (2002). Technique of da Vinci robot-assisted anatomic radical prostatectomy. Adult Urology, 60(4), 569–72. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12385908
25.
YancoH. a.DruryJ. (2004). Classifying human-robot interaction: an updated taxonomy. 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37583), 3, 2841–2846. doi:10.1109/ICSMC.2004.1400763
