Cover not available

Article published In: Social Cues in Robot Interaction, Trust and Acceptance
Edited by Alessandra Rossi, Kheng Lee Koay, Silvia Moros, Patrick Holthaus and Marcus Scheunemann
[Interaction Studies 20:3] 2019
► pp. 455–486

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

On the impact of different types of errors on trust in human-robot interaction

Are laboratory-based HRI experiments trustworthy?

 | University of Bristol
 | University of Bristol
 | Radboud University
 | University of Bristol
 | University of the West of England
 | University of the West of England
Published online: 18 November 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.18067.flo
Abstract
Trust is a key dimension of human-robot interaction (HRI), and has often been studied in the HRI community. A common challenge arises from the difficulty of assessing trust levels in ecologically invalid environments: we present in this paper two independent laboratory studies, totalling 160 participants, where we investigate the impact of different types of errors on resulting trust, using both behavioural and subjective measures of trust. While we found a (weak) general effect of errors on reported and observed level of trust, no significant differences between the type of errors were found in either of our studies. We discuss this negative result in light of our experimental protocols, and argue for the community to move towards alternative methodologies to assess trust.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Factors affecting trust
      • 1.1.1Robot factors
        • Robot errors
        • Etiquette
        • Communication style
        • Behaviour transparency
      • 1.1.2Human factors
        • Human perceptions of robots
        • Previous experience of robots
        • Personality traits
      • 1.1.3Environmental factors
        • Severity of human-robot interaction scenario
    • 1.2Measuring trust in human-robot interaction
      • Questionnaires
    • 1.3Investigating the impact of different errors on trust
      • 1.3.1Research questions
      • 1.3.2Hypotheses
  • 2.Study 1: Impact of errors and robot acknowledgement of errors on trust
    • 2.1Methodology
      • 2.1.1Experimental procedure
        • Robot control
        • Procedure
      • 2.1.2Data collection
      • 2.1.3Participants demographics
    • 2.2Results
      • 2.2.1Hypothesis 1: No error vs. erroneous conditions
      • 2.2.2Hypothesis 2: Technical failure vs. decision-level error conditions
      • 2.2.3Hypothesis 3: Acknowledgement vs. no acknowledgement when a fault occurs
      • 2.2.4Errors and acknowledgement behaviours conditions internal interactions
  • 3.Study 2: Impact of errors on proxemics
    • 3.1Methodology
      • 3.1.1Experiment procedure
      • 3.1.2Data collection
      • 3.1.3Participant demographics
    • 3.2Results
      • 3.2.1Faulty behaviour vs baseline
      • 3.2.2Technical vs socio-cognitive error
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Potential confounds
    • 4.2A lack of negative results?
  • 5.Conclusion
  • 6.Resources for replication
    • Study
    • Data analysis
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (44)
References
Allen, M., Poggiali, D., Whitaker, K., Marshall, T. R., & Kievit, R. (2018, August). Raincloud plots: a multi-platform tool for robust data visualization. PeerJ Preprints, 6, e27137v1. Retrieved from Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International journal of social robotics, 1 (1), 71–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bartneck, C., Suzuki, T., Kanda, T., & Nomura, T. (2007). The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with aibo on their attitude towards robots. Ai & Society, 21 (1–2), 217–230.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baxter, P., Kennedy, J. E. S., Lemaignan, S., & Belpaeme, T. (2016). From characterising three years of hri to methodology and reporting recommendations. In Proceedings of the 2016 acm/ieee human-robot interaction conference (alt.hri). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bickmore, T., Pfeifer, L., Schulman, D., Perera, S., Senanayake, C., & Nazmi, I. (2008). Public displays of affect: Deploying relational agents in public spaces. In Proceedings of chi’08 (pp. 3297–3302). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breazeal, C., Kidd, C., Thomaz, A., Hoffman, G., & Berlin, M. (2005). Effects of nonverbal communication on efficiency and robustness in human-robot teamwork. In Proceedings of the ieee international conference on intelligent robots and systems (pp. 708–713). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corritore, C., Kracher, B., & Wiedenbeck, S. (2003). Online trust: Concepts, evolving themes, a model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(6), 737–758. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Kaouri, C., Walters, M., Koay, K., & Werry, I. (2005). What is a robot companion – friend, assistant or butler. In Proceedings of the ieee international conference on intelligent systems and robots (pp. 1192–1197). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Desai, M., Medvedev, M., Vázquez, M., McSheehy, S., Gadea-Omelchenko Bruggeman, S., … Yanco, H. (2012). Effects of changing reliability on trust of robot systems. In Proceedings of the acm/ieee conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 73–80). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goetz, J., Kiesler, S., & Powers, A. (2003). Matching robot appearance and behaviour to tasks to improve human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of ieee roman international workshop on robot and human interactive communication (pp. 55–60).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the big five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 371, 504–528. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, K., & Wegner, D. (2012). Feeling robots and human zombies: Mind perception and the uncanny valley. Cognition, 125(1), 125–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guznov, S., Lyons, J., Nelson, A., & Woolley, M. (2016). The effects of automation error types on operators’ trust and reliance. In S. Lackey & R. Shumaker (Eds.), Virtual, augmented and mixed reality (pp. 116–124). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamacher, A., Bianchi-Berthouze, N., Pipe, A. G., & Eder, K. (2016). Believing in BERT: Using expressive communication to enhance trust and counteract operational error in physical human-robot interaction. In Robot and human interactive communication (ro-man), 2016 25th ieee international symposium on (pp. 493–500). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hancock, P., Billings, D., Schaefer, K., Chen, J., de Visser, E., & Parasuraman, R. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 53(5), 517–527. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iwamura, Y., Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2011). Do elderly people prefer a conversational humanoid as a shopping assistant partner in supermarkets. In Proceedings of the acm/ieee international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 449–456). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human factors, 46(1), 50–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. J., Knox, W. B., Wormwood, J. B., Breazeal, C., & Desteno, D. (2013). Computationally modelling interpersonal trust. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(893). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, M., Kiesler, S., & Forlizzi, J. (2010). Receptionist or information kiosk: how do people talk with a robot? In Proceedings of the 2010 acm conference on computer supported cooperative work (pp. 31–40). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemaignan, S., Fink, J., & Dillenbourg, P. (2014). The dynamics of anthropomorphism in robotics. In in proceedings of the international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 226–227). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lucas, G., Boberg, J., Traum, D., Artstein, R., Gratch, J., Gainer, A., … Leuski, A. (2018). Getting to know each other: The role of social dialogue in recovery from errors in social robots. In Proceedings of the 2018 acm/ieee international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 344–351). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709–734. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mirnig, N., Stollnberger, G., Miksch, M., Stadler, S., Giuliani, M., & Tscheligi, M. (2017). To err is robot: How humans assess and act toward an erroneous social robot. In Frontiers in robotics and ai. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moray, N., & Inagaki, T. (1999). Laboratory studies of trust between humans and machines in automated systems. Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control, 21 (4–5), 203–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7(4), 33–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muir, B., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation: Part II. “experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation.”. In Ergonomics (pp. 429–460). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nass, C., & Lee, K. (2000). Does computer-generated speech manifest personality? an experimental test of similarity-attraction. In Proceedings of chi’00 (p. 329–336). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nomura, T., & Kanda, T. (2003, Nov). On proposing the concept of robot anxiety and considering measurement of it. In The 12th ieee international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, 2003. proceedings. roman 2003. (p. 373–378). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pages, J., Marchionni, L., & Ferro, F. (2016). Tiago: the modular robot that adapts to different research needs. In International workshop on robot modularity, iros.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Parasuraman, R., & Miller, C. (2004). Trust and etiquette in high-criticality automated systems. Communication of the ACM, 47(4), 51–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ray, C., Mondada, F., & Siegwart, R. (2008). What do people expect from robots? In Proceedings of the ieee/rsj 2008 international conference on intelligent robots and systems (pp. 3816–3821). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robinette, P., Howard, A. M., & Wagner, A. R. (2017). Effect of robot performance on human-robot trust in time-critical situations. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 47(4), 425–436. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robinette, P., Li, W., Allen, R., Howard, A. M., & Wagner, A. R. (2016). Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios. In The eleventh acm/ieee international conference on human robot interaction (pp. 101–108). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salem, M., Eyssel, F., Rohlfing, K., Kopp, S., & Joulbin, F. (2013). To err is human(-like): Effects of robot gesture on perceived anthropomorphism and likeability. International Journal of Social Robotics, 51, 313–323. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., & Dautenhahn, K. (2015). Would you trust a (faulty) robot?: Effects of error, task type and personality on human-robot cooperation and trust. In Proceedings of the tenth annual acm/ieee international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 141–148). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sarkar, S., Araiza-Illan, D., & Eder, K. (2017). Effects of faults, experience, and personality on trust in a robot co-worker. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.02335.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2006). Interactive humanoid robots for a science museum. In Proceedings of the 1st acm sigchi/sigart conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 305–312). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidner, C., Lee, C., & Lesh, N. (2003). Engagement rules for human-robot collaborative interactions. In Proceedings of the ieee international conference on systems man and cybernetics (pp. 3957–3962). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thrun, S., Schulte, J., & Rosenburg, C. (2000). Interaction with mobile robots in public places. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 7–11.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wiegmann, D. A., Rich, A., & Zhang, H. (2001). Automated diagnostic aids: The effects of aid reliability on users’ trust and reliance. In Theoretical issues in ergonomic science (p. 352–367). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, J., Straus, S., & McEvily, B. (2006). All in due time: The development of trust in computer-mediated and face-to-face teams. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 99(1), 16–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wortham, Robert H., and Andreas Theodorou. (2017). “Robot transparency, trust and utility.” Connection Science 29.3 (2017): 242–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (34)

Cited by 34 other publications

Cantucci, Filippo, Marco Marini & Rino Falcone
2026. The Role of Robot Competence, Autonomy, and Personality on Trust Formation in Human–Robot Interaction. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 15:3 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Do, Michael, Soo Jin Lee & Jongho Seol
2026. Human–Robot Interactive Performance Analysis with Enhanced Metacognition. Journal of Computer Information Systems ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Krakovski, Maya, Shikhar Kumar & Yael Edan
2026. Levels of Explanation for Error Resolution in HRI. In Social Robotics + AI [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 16133], ► pp. 544 ff. DOI logo
Legler, Franziska & Angelika C. Bullinger
2025. How to achieve human-centered automation: the importance of trust for safety-critical behavior and intention to use in human-robot collaboration. Frontiers in Organizational Psychology 3 DOI logo
Louca, Joe, John Vrublevskis, Kerstin Eder & Antonia Tzemanaki
2025. Trustworthy Delayed Teleoperation via an Imperfect Regolith Model. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 10:8 ► pp. 8372 ff. DOI logo
Matthews, Michael J., Runkun Su, Lindsey Yonish, Shawn McClean, Joel Koopman & Kai Chi Yam
2025. A Review of Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms, and Robots Through the Lens of Stakeholder Theory. Journal of Management 51:6 ► pp. 2627 ff. DOI logo
Naendrup-Poell, Lara & Linda Onnasch
2025. Predictive robot eyes enhance attentional guidance in cooperative human–robot interaction. Scientific Reports 15:1 DOI logo
Riar, Marc, Mareike Weber, Jens Ebert & Benedikt Morschheuser
2025. Can Gamification Foster Trust-Building in Human-Robot Collaboration? An Experiment in Virtual Reality. Information Systems Frontiers 27:5 ► pp. 2001 ff. DOI logo
Safdari, Abootaleb
2025. Toward an empathy-based trust in human-otheroid relations. AI & SOCIETY 40:5 ► pp. 3123 ff. DOI logo
Severitt, Björn Rene, Yannick Sauer, Nora Jane Castner, Wolfgang Fuhl & Siegfried Wahl
2025. Proceedings of the 2025 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Verhelst, Eva, Ruben Janssens & Tony Belpaeme
2025. Enabling Autonomous and Adaptive Social Robots in Education: A Vision for the Application of Generative AI. In Social Robots in Education [Studies in Computational Intelligence, 1194], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Chen, Na, Jiajia Cao & Xueyan Hu
2024. The Effects of Robot Managers’ Reward-Punishment Behaviours on Human–Robot Trust and Job Performance. International Journal of Social Robotics 16:3 ► pp. 529 ff. DOI logo
Elias, Alex & Maria Jose Galvez Trigo
2024. 2024 33rd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (ROMAN), ► pp. 638 ff. DOI logo
Gideoni, Romi, Shanee Honig & Tal Oron-Gilad
2024. Is It Personal? The Impact of Personally Relevant Robotic Failures (PeRFs) on Humans' Trust, Likeability, and Willingness to Use the Robot. International Journal of Social Robotics 16:6 ► pp. 1049 ff. DOI logo
Honig, Shanee, Alon Bartal, Yisrael Parmet & Tal Oron-Gilad
2024. Using Online Customer Reviews to Classify, Predict, and Learn About Domestic Robot Failures. International Journal of Social Robotics 16:6 ► pp. 1105 ff. DOI logo
Khavas, Zahra Rezaei, Monish Reddy Kotturu, Reza Azadeh & Paul Robinette
2024. 2024 33rd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (ROMAN), ► pp. 1126 ff. DOI logo
Kopp, Tobias
2024. Facets of Trust and Distrust in Collaborative Robots at the Workplace: Towards a Multidimensional and Relational Conceptualisation. International Journal of Social Robotics 16:6 ► pp. 1445 ff. DOI logo
Louca, Joe, Kerstin Eder, John Vrublevskis & Antonia Tzemanaki
2024. Impact of Haptic Feedback in High Latency Teleoperation for Space Applications. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 13:2 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Na, Gyounghwa, Junho Choi & Hyunmin Kang
2024. It’s Not My Fault, But I’m to Blame: The Effect of a Home Robot’s Attribution and Approach Movement on Trust and Emotion of Users. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 40:15 ► pp. 4152 ff. DOI logo
Velasco-Guillen, Rodrigo J., Adna Bliek, Josep M. Font-Llagunes, Bram Vanderborght & Philipp Beckerle
2024. Compensating elastic faults in a torque-assisted knee exoskeleton: functional evaluation and user perception study. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 21:1 DOI logo
Wang, Kexin, Jianan Lu, Shuyi Ruan & Yue Qi
2024. Continuous Error Timing in Automation: The Peak-End Effect on Human-Automation Trust. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 40:8 ► pp. 1832 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Qiao, Ziqi Wang, Marc G. Carmichael, Dikai Liu & Chin-Teng Lin
2024. 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), ► pp. 907 ff. DOI logo
Akalin, Neziha, Andrey Kiselev, Annica Kristoffersson & Amy Loutfi
2023. A Taxonomy of Factors Influencing Perceived Safety in Human–Robot Interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics 15:12 ► pp. 1993 ff. DOI logo
Kopp, Tobias, Marco Baumgartner, Mike Seeger & Steffen Kinkel
2023. Perspectives of managers and workers on the implementation of automated-guided vehicles (AGVs)—a quantitative survey. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 126:11-12 ► pp. 5259 ff. DOI logo
Kraus, Johannes Maria, Julia Merger, Felix Gröner & Jessica Pätz
2023. Companion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, ► pp. 436 ff. DOI logo
Legler, Franziska, Jonas Trezl, Dorothea Langer, Max Bernhagen, Andre Dettmann & Angelika C. Bullinger
2023. Emotional Experience in Human–Robot Collaboration: Suitability of Virtual Reality Scenarios to Study Interactions beyond Safety Restrictions. Robotics 12:6 ► pp. 168 ff. DOI logo
Nesset, Birthe, Gnanathusharan Rajendran, Jose David Aguas Lopes & Helen Hastie
2022. 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), ► pp. 950 ff. DOI logo
Kopp, Tobias, Marco Baumgartner & Steffen Kinkel
2021. Success factors for introducing industrial human-robot interaction in practice: an empirically driven framework. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 112:3-4 ► pp. 685 ff. DOI logo
Zonca, Joshua, Anna Folsø & Alessandra Sciutti
2021. The role of reciprocity in human-robot social influence. iScience 24:12 ► pp. 103424 ff. DOI logo
Zonca, Joshua, Anna Folsø & Alessandra Sciutti
2023. Social Influence Under Uncertainty in Interaction with Peers, Robots and Computers. International Journal of Social Robotics 15:2 ► pp. 249 ff. DOI logo
Kontogiorgos, Dimosthenis, Sanne van Waveren, Olle Wallberg, Andre Pereira, Iolanda Leite & Joakim Gustafson
2020. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Stiber, Maia & Chien-Ming Huang
2020. Companion Publication of the 2020 International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, ► pp. 97 ff. DOI logo
Vattheuer, Christopher, Annalena Nora Baecker, Denise Y. Geiskkovitch, Stela Hanbyeol Seo, Daniel J. Rea & James E. Young
2020. Blind Trust: How Making a Device Humanoid Reduces the Impact of Functional Errors on Trust. In Social Robotics [Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 12483], ► pp. 207 ff. DOI logo
Wijnen, Luc, Séverin Lemaignan & Paul Bremner
2020. Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, ► pp. 514 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue