Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3610978.3640578acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageshriConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper
Open access

Beyond the Default: The Effects of Adaptable Robot Speed in Industrial Human-Robot Interaction

Published: 11 March 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Collaborative robots have gained popularity in industrial manufacturing due to their flexibility. However, one substantial challenge is to utilize this flexibility human-centered. While there is considerable research emphasis on system-controlled approaches, the exploration of user-controlled adaptation has been comparatively overlooked. Therefore, this study investigated user-controlled speed adaptation in an experimental within-subject design. We assessed mental workload of 36 participants using subjective, physiological, and secondary task performance measures. Moreover, we investigated acceptance, perceived control, and the influence of desirability of control. The primary task simulated assembling circuit boards in a sequential scenario. The results indicated that workload did not decrease with speed adaptation. Conversely, secondary task reaction time was even slower. However, participants generally preferred the adaptation and reported a greater sense of control. In general, the findings suggest that adapting speed could have positive subjective and possible negative performance-related aspects.

Supplemental Material

MP4 File
Supplemental video

References

[1]
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 2019. NASA TLX Task Load Index. https://humansystems.arc.nasa.gov/groups/TLX/downloads/TLXScale.pdf Retrieved 2023--11-05 from
[2]
Muneeb Imtiaz Ahmad, Omar Mubin, and Joanne Orlando. 2017. A systematic review of adaptivity in human-robot interaction. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, Vol. 1, 3 (2017), 14.
[3]
Neziha Akalin, Annica Kristoffersson, and Amy Loutfi. 2022. Do you feel safe with your robot? Factors influencing perceived safety in human-robot interaction based on subjective and objective measures. International journal of human-computer studies, Vol. 158 (2022), 102744.
[4]
Tamio Arai, Ryu Kato, and Marina Fujita. 2010. Assessment of operator stress induced by robot collaboration in assembly. CIRP annals, Vol. 59, 1 (2010), 5--8.
[5]
Christina Bröhl, Jochen Nelles, Christopher Brandl, Alexander Mertens, and Christopher M Schlick. 2016. TAM Reloaded: A Technology Acceptance Model for Human-Robot Cooperation in Production Systems. In HCI International 2016 -- Posters' Extended Abstracts, Constantine Stephanidis (Ed.). Springer, Cham, Schweiz, 97--103. https://doi.org/10.1007/978--3--319--40548--3_16
[6]
Achim Buerkle, Harveen Matharu, Ali Al-Yacoub, Niels Lohse, Thomas Bamber, and Pedro Ferreira. 2022. An adaptive human sensor framework for human--robot collaboration. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology (2022), 1--16.
[7]
Jerry M Burger and Harris M Cooper. 1979. The desirability of control. Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 3, 4 (12 1979), 381--393. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00994052
[8]
Gloria Calhoun. 2022. Adaptable (Not Adaptive) Automation: Forefront of Human--Automation Teaming. Human factors, Vol. 64, 2 (2022), 269--277.
[9]
Adeline Chanseau, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Kheng Lee Koay, and Maha Salem. 2016. Who is in charge? Sense of control and robot anxiety in human-robot interaction. In 2016 25th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN). IEEE, 743--748.
[10]
Adeline Chanseau, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Kheng Lee Koay, Michael L Walters, Gabriella Lakatos, and Maha Salem. 2019. How does peoples' perception of control depend on the criticality of a task performed by a robot. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, Vol. 10, 1 (2019), 380--400.
[11]
Andrew M. Colman. 2009. method of limits. Oxford University Press. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199534067.001.0001/acref-9780199534067-e-5041
[12]
Vincent G Duffy, Calvin KL Or, and Vivian WM Lau. 2006. Perception of safe robot speed in virtual and real industrial environments. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, Vol. 16, 4 (2006), 369--383.
[13]
Shirine El Zaatari, Mohamed Marei, Weidong Li, and Zahid Usman. 2019. Cobot programming for collaborative industrial tasks: An overview. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 116 (2019), 162--180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2019.03.003
[14]
Connor Esterwood, Kyle Essenmacher, Han Yang, Fanpan Zeng, and Lionel Peter Robert. 2021. A meta-analysis of human personality and robot acceptance in human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1--18.
[15]
Caleb Furlough, Thomas Stokes, and Douglas J Gillan. 2021. Attributing blame to robots: The influence of robot autonomy. Human factors, Vol. 63, 4 (2021), 592--602.
[16]
Riccardo Gervasi, Luca Mastrogiacomo, and Fiorenzo Franceschini. 2020. A conceptual framework to evaluate human-robot collaboration. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 108 (2020), 841--865.
[17]
Sugeeth Gopinathan, Sonja K Ötting, and Jochen J Steil. 2017. A user study on personalized stiffness control and task specificity in physical human--robot interaction. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, Vol. 4 (2017), 58.
[18]
Caroline E Harriott, Tao Zhang, and Julie A Adams. 2011. Evaluating the applicability of current models of workload to peer-based human-robot teams. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction. 45--52.
[19]
Sandra G Hart. 2006. NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 50, 9 (10 2006), 904--908. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605000909
[20]
Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In Human Mental Workload, Peter A. Hancock and Najmedin Meshkati (Eds.). Advances in Psychology, Vol. 52. North-Holland, 139--183. https://doi.org//10.1016/S0166--4115(08)62386--9
[21]
Pamela J Hinds. 1998. User Control and Its Many Facets: A Study of Perceived Control in Human-Computer Interaction. Technical Report. Hewlett Packard Laboratories California. https://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/98/HPL-98--154.pdf
[22]
Dimitri Lacroix, Ricarda Wullenkord, and Friederike Eyssel. 2022. I Designed It, So I Trust It: The Influence of Customization on Psychological Ownership and Trust Toward Robots. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 601--614.
[23]
Eloise Matheson, Riccardo Minto, Emanuele GG Zampieri, Maurizio Faccio, and Giulio Rosati. 2019. Human--robot collaboration in manufacturing applications: A review. Robotics, Vol. 8, 4 (2019), 100.
[24]
Bernt Meerbeek, Jettie Hoonhout, Peter Bingley, and Jacques MB Terken. 2008. The influence of robot personality on perceived and preferred level of user control. Interaction Studies, Vol. 9, 2 (2008), 204--229.
[25]
Linda Onnasch and Terpsichore Panayotidis. 2020. Social Loafing with Robots -- An Empirical Investigation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 64, 1 (12 2020), 97--101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181320641026
[26]
Linda Onnasch and Eileen Roesler. 2021. A taxonomy to structure and analyze human--robot interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 13, 4 (2021), 833--849.
[27]
Calvin KL Or, Vincent G Duffy, and Chui Chui Cheung. 2009. Perception of safe robot idle time in virtual reality and real industrial environments. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 39, 5 (2009), 807--812.
[28]
Sonja K Ötting, Lisa Masjutin, Jochen J Steil, and Günter W Maier. 2022. Let's work together: A meta-analysis on robot design features that enable successful human--robot interaction at work. Human Factors, Vol. 64, 6 (2022), 1027--1050.
[29]
Tommaso Panchetti, Luca Pietrantoni, Gabriele Puzzo, Luca Gualtieri, and Federico Fraboni. 2023. Assessing the Relationship between Cognitive Workload, Workstation Design, User Acceptance and Trust in Collaborative Robots. Applied Sciences, Vol. 13, 3 (2023), 1720.
[30]
Christina Schmidbauer, Setareh Zafari, Bernd Hader, and Sebastian Schlund. 2023. An Empirical Study on Workers' Preferences in Human--Robot Task Assignment in Industrial Assembly Systems. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, Vol. 53, 2 (2023), 293--302.
[31]
Thomas B Sheridan. 2016. Human--robot interaction: status and challenges. Human factors, Vol. 58, 4 (2016), 525--532.
[32]
Matthew Story, Phil Webb, Sarah R Fletcher, Gilbert Tang, Cyril Jaksic, and Jon Carberry. 2022. Do speed and proximity affect human-robot collaboration with an industrial robot arm? International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 14, 4 (2022), 1087--1102.
[33]
Christopher D Wickens. 2002. Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, Vol. 3, 2 (2002), 159--177. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220210123806
[34]
Christopher D Wickens, Justin G Hollands, Simon Banbury, and R Parasuraman. 2015. Mental workload, stress, and individual differences: cognitive and neuroergonomic perspectives. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance (International Edition) (2015), 346--376.
[35]
Setareh Zafari and Sabine T Koeszegi. 2021. Attitudes toward attributed agency: Role of perceived control. International Journal of Social Robotics, Vol. 13, 8 (2021), 2071--2080.

Index Terms

  1. Beyond the Default: The Effects of Adaptable Robot Speed in Industrial Human-Robot Interaction

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      HRI '24: Companion of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction
      March 2024
      1408 pages
      ISBN:9798400703232
      DOI:10.1145/3610978
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 11 March 2024

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. acceptance
      2. flexibility
      3. industrial HRI
      4. perceived control
      5. workload

      Qualifiers

      • Short-paper

      Conference

      HRI '24
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 268 of 1,124 submissions, 24%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 218
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)218
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)38
      Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Login options

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media