“Sorry, it was my fault”: Repairing trust in human-robot interactions

Zhang, Xinyi

doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103031

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 127 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This indicates that regardless of the particular type, it is generally beneficial to provide an explanation. Our results are therefore consistent with other studies that found a positive influence of recovery strategies on robot perceptions [23][24][25][26].…”

Section: The Impact Of Justificationssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…In addition to apologies, various recovery strategies, such as ignoring, blaming, justifying/explanation, etc., have already been examined by researchers [24] within the field of HRI [24][25][26]. Choi and colleagues compared apologies with explanations given by a robot after a service failure [25].…”

Section: Robotic Failuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, caregivers become the primary interaction partners, compared to social robots having the patients as primary interaction partners. Previous studies, however, have included students as participants [23,24] or a random sample [25,26]. A major benefit of our study is the inclusion of caregivers.…”

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, robotic verbal communication is prone to failures in terms of processing speech input from various users in unstructured environments and providing accordingly appropriate answers and actions [11]. Hence, it is necessary to consider failure consequences (e.g., how caregivers respond to communication failures of robots) and possible countermeasures (e.g., recovery strategies) to ensure the long-term use of robots [11,24]. Accordingly, we investigated which type of explanation is more suitable in care settings for justifying failures.…”

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

When Robots Fail—A VR Investigation on Caregivers’ Tolerance towards Communication and Processing Failures

Klüber

Onnasch

2022

Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robots are increasingly used in healthcare to support caregivers in their daily work routines. To ensure an effortless and easy interaction between caregivers and robots, communication via natural language is expected from robots. However, robotic speech bears a large potential for technical failures, which includes processing and communication failures. It is therefore necessary to investigate how caregivers perceive and respond to robots with erroneous communication. We recruited thirty caregivers, who interacted in a virtual reality setting with a robot. It was investigated whether different kinds of failures are more likely to be forgiven with technical or human-like justifications. Furthermore, we determined how tolerant caregivers are with a robot constantly returning a process failure and whether this depends on the robot’s response pattern (constant vs. variable). Participants showed the same forgiveness towards the two justifications. However, females liked the human-like justification more and males liked the technical justification more. Providing justifications with any reasonable content seems sufficient to achieve positive effects. Robots with a constant response pattern were liked more, although both patterns achieved the same tolerance threshold from caregivers, which was around seven failed requests. Due to the experimental setup, the tolerance for communication failures was probably increased and should be adjusted in real-life situations.

show abstract

Section: The Impact Of Justificationssupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Robotic Failuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Research Questions and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

When Robots Fail—A VR Investigation on Caregivers’ Tolerance towards Communication and Processing Failures

Klüber

Onnasch

2022

Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the HRI literature, the effectiveness of trust repair strategies has produced mixed results [22]. It is therefore possible that various moderating factors, such as timing [33,34], the number of repeated trust violations [35], violation type [36,37], anthropomorphism [38], attitude [35], and violation severity [39], can influence the efficacy of these strategies. The field of trust repair in HRI, however, is still in its early stages, and there is much that remains to be explored.…”

Section: Trust Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Esterwood

Robert

2022

2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robot co-workers, like human co-workers, make mistakes that undermine trust. Yet, trust is just as important in promoting human-robot collaboration as it is in promoting human-human collaboration. In addition, individuals can significantly differ in their attitudes toward robots, which can also impact or hinder their trust in robots. To better understand how individual attitude can influence trust repair strategies, we propose a theoretical model that draws from the theory of cognitive dissonance. To empirically verify this model, we conducted a between-subjects experiment with 100 participants assigned to one of four repair strategies (apologies, denials, explanations, or promises) over three trust violations. Individual attitudes did moderate the efficacy of repair strategies and this effect differed over successive trust violations. Specifically, repair strategies were most effective relative to individual attitude during the second of the three trust violations, and promises were the trust repair strategy most impacted by an individual's attitude.

show abstract

Effects of Explanations by Robots on Trust Repair in Human-Robot Collaborations

Bai,

Chen

2024

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Sorry, it was my fault”: Repairing trust in human-robot interactions

Cited by 11 publications

References 127 publications

When Robots Fail—A VR Investigation on Caregivers’ Tolerance towards Communication and Processing Failures

When Robots Fail—A VR Investigation on Caregivers’ Tolerance towards Communication and Processing Failures

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

Effects of Explanations by Robots on Trust Repair in Human-Robot Collaborations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About