Do You Still Trust Me? Human-Robot Trust Repair Strategies

Abstract

Trust is vital to promoting human and robot collaboration, but like human teammates, robots make mistakes that undermine trust. As a result, a human's perception of his or her robot teammate's trustworthiness can dramatically decrease [1], [2], [3], [4]. Trustworthiness consists of three distinct dimensions: ability (i.e. competency), benevolence (i.e. concern for the trustor) and integrity (i.e. honesty) [5], [6]. Taken together, decreases in trustworthiness decreases trust in the robot [7]. To address this, we conducted a 2 (high vs. low anthropomorphism) x 4 (trust repair strategies) between-subjects experiment. Preliminary results of the first 164 participants (between 19 and 24 per cell) highlight which repair strategies are effective relative to ability, integrity and benevolence and the robot's anthropomorphism. Overall, this paper contributes to the HRI trust repair literature.

Ethics in human–AI teaming: principles and perspectives

“…However, not all explanation types have an equal impact on human attitudes and behavior. In an online study, researchers examined the influence of different explanation types on the trustworthiness of a robot [47]. They found that apologies and promises can be an effective method for repairing trust in intelligent machines with apologies with explanations being most beneficial for integrity perceptions and promises having the greatest impact on perceived benevolence.…”

Having the Right Attitude: How Attitude Impacts Trust Repair in Human—Robot Interaction

“…Robots, like humans, inevitably make mistakes; when this occurs trust repair is vital to minimizing the loss of trust [1], [5], [8], [11]- [17]. Trust repair refers to the efforts undertaken by a trustee to restore trust following an actual or perceived trust violation [5], [8], [18]- [20].…”

“…These efforts can rely on one of several strategies: apologies, denials, explanations, or promises [5], [11], [21]- [24]. Apologies are a communication and/or expression of remorse or regret [5], [8], [25]- [27]; denials are a rejection of culpability and often a redirection of blame [5], [11], [21]- [24]; explanations are clear and direct reasoning behind why a violation of trust occurred [1], [5], [8], [28]; and promises are statements conveying the intention to correct future behavior [8], [16], [22].…”

“…Promises, unlike apologies, denials, and explanations, are relatively under-examined in the HRI trust repair literature. In particular, two studies reported the direct impact of promises on trust [1], [37]. Specifically, the first of these [37] examined promises that were either provided separately or given jointly with an explanation.…”

“…The importance of trust in human-robot collaboration has spurred much interest in the study of trust repair. Humanrobot trust repair can be defined as the approaches taken to amend the loss of trust between the human and the robot [1]. Humans are increasingly being expected to work with and actively collaborate with robot co-workers in new work arrangements [2]- [5].…”