Difficulties in Perceiving and Understanding Robot Reliability Changes in a Sequential Binary Task
Authors: 
Hiroshi Furuya, Laura Battistel, Zubin Datta Choudhary, Matt Gottsacker, Gerd Bruder, Gregory F WelchAuthors Info & Claims
Hiroshi Furuya, Laura Battistel, Zubin Datta Choudhary, Matt Gottsacker, Gerd Bruder, Gregory F WelchAuthors Info & ClaimsArticle No.: 22, Pages 1 - 11
Abstract
Human-robot teams push the boundaries of what both humans and robots can accomplish. In order for the team to function well, the human must accurately assess the robot’s capabilities to calibrate the trust between the human and robot. In this paper, we use virtual reality (VR), a widely accepted tool in studying human-robot interaction (HRI), to study human behaviors affecting their detection and understanding of changes in a simulated robot’s reliability. We present a human-subject study to see how different reliability change factors may affect this process. Our results demonstrate that participants make judgements about robot reliability before they have accumulated sufficient evidence to make objectively high-confidence inferences about robot reliability. We show that this reliability change observation behavior diverges from behavior expectations based on the probability distribution functions used to describe observation outcomes.
Supplemental Material
MP4 File
Description video
- Download
- 119.68 MB
References
[1]
[n. d.]. Meta XR All-in-One SDK | Integration | Unity Asset Store. https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/integration/meta-xr-all-in-one-sdk-269657
[2]
Hirotugu Akaike. 1973. Maximum Likelihood Identification of Gaussian Autoregressive Moving Average Models. Biometrika 60, 2 (1973), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.2307/2334537 Publisher: [Oxford University Press, Biometrika Trust].
[3]
Elkan G. Akyürek, Nils Kappelmann, Marc Volkert, and Hedderik van Rijn. 2017. What You See Is What You Remember: Visual Chunking by Temporal Integration Enhances Working Memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 29, 12 (Dec. 2017), 2025–2036. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01175
[4]
Michael J. Barnes, Jessie Y. C. Chen, Florian Jentsch, and Elizabeth S. Redden. 2011. Designing Effective Soldier-Robot Teams in Complex Environments: Training, Interfaces, and Individual Differences. In Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, Don Harris (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 484–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21741-8_51
[5]
Brock Bass, Meghan Goodwin, Kayla Brennan, Richard Pak, and Anne McLaughlin. 2013. Effects of Age and Gender Stereotypes on Trust in an Anthropomorphic Decision Aid. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 57, 1 (Sept. 2013), 1575–1579. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213571351
[6]
Shreyas Bhat, Joseph B. Lyons, Cong Shi, and X. Jessie Yang. 2022. Clustering Trust Dynamics in a Human-Robot Sequential Decision-Making Task. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters 7, 4 (Oct. 2022), 8815–8822. https://doi.org/10.1109/LRA.2022.3188902
[7]
Annika Boos, Olivia Herzog, Jakob Reinhardt, Klaus Bengler, and Markus Zimmermann. 2022. A Compliance–Reactance Framework for Evaluating Human-Robot Interaction. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 9 (May 2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.733504 Publisher: Frontiers.
[8]
Grigore C. Burdea. 1999. Invited review: the synergy between virtual reality and robotics. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 15, 3 (June 1999), 400–410. https://doi.org/10.1109/70.768174
[9]
Min Chen, Stefanos Nikolaidis, Harold Soh, David Hsu, and Siddhartha Srinivasa. 2018. Planning with Trust for Human-Robot Collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction(HRI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1145/3171221.3171264
[10]
Committee on Human-System Integration Research Topics for the 711th Human Performance Wing of the Air Force Research Laboratory, Board on Human-Systems Integration, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, and National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Human-AI Teaming: State-of-the-Art and Research Needs. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.https://doi.org/10.17226/26355
[11]
Enrique Coronado, Takuya Kiyokawa, Gustavo A. Garcia Ricardez, Ixchel G. Ramirez-Alpizar, Gentiane Venture, and Natsuki Yamanobe. 2022. Evaluating quality in human-robot interaction: A systematic search and classification of performance and human-centered factors, measures and metrics towards an industry 5.0. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 63 (April 2022), 392–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2022.04.007
[12]
Ewart J. de Visser, Marieke M. M. Peeters, Malte F. Jung, Spencer Kohn, Tyler H. Shaw, Richard Pak, and Mark A. Neerincx. 2020. Towards a Theory of Longitudinal Trust Calibration in Human–Robot Teams. International Journal of Social Robotics 12, 2 (May 2020), 459–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00596-x
[13]
Marc Peter Deisenroth, A. Aldo Faisal, and Cheng Soon Ong. 2020. Mathematics for Machine Learning. Cambridge University Press.
[14]
Mustafa Demir, Nathan J. McNeese, Jaime C. Gorman, Nancy J. Cooke, Christopher W. Myers, and David A. Grimm. 2021. Exploration of Teammate Trust and Interaction Dynamics in Human-Autonomy Teaming. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 51, 6 (Dec. 2021), 696–705. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2021.3115058
[15]
Morteza Dianatfar, Jyrki Latokartano, and Minna Lanz. 2021. Review on existing VR/AR solutions in human–robot collaboration. Procedia CIRP 97 (Jan. 2021), 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.259
[16]
Mihai Duguleana, Florin Grigorie Barbuceanu, and Gheorghe Mogan. 2011. Evaluating Human-Robot Interaction during a Manipulation Experiment Conducted in Immersive Virtual Reality. In Virtual and Mixed Reality - New Trends, Randall Shumaker (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 164–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22021-0_19
[17]
Franz Faul, Edgar Erdfelder, Albert-Georg Lang, and Axel Buchner. 2007. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods 39, 2 (May 2007), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
[18]
John Fox. 2015. Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models. Sage publications.
[19]
Piotr Fratczak, Yee Mey Goh, Peter Kinnell, Andrea Soltoggio, and Laura Justham. 2019. Understanding Human Behaviour in Industrial Human-Robot Interaction by Means of Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the Halfway to the Future Symposium 2019(HTTF 2019). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3363384.3363403
[20]
Scott A. Green, Mark Billinghurst, XiaoQi Chen, and J. Geoffrey Chase. 2008. Human-Robot Collaboration: A Literature Review and Augmented Reality Approach in Design. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 5, 1 (March 2008), 1. https://doi.org/10.5772/5664
[21]
Yaohui Guo and X. Jessie Yang. 2021. Modeling and Predicting Trust Dynamics in Human–Robot Teaming: A Bayesian Inference Approach. International Journal of Social Robotics 13, 8 (Dec. 2021), 1899–1909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00703-3
[22]
Kasper Hald, Katharina Weitz, Elisabeth André, and Matthias Rehm. 2021. “An Error Occurred!” - Trust Repair With Virtual Robot Using Levels of Mistake Explanation. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction(HAI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1145/3472307.3484170
[23]
Robert J. Hall. 1996. Trusting your assistant. In Proceedings of the 11th Knowledge-Based Software Engineering Conference. IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, Syracuse, NY, USA, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1109/KBSE.1996.552822
[24]
Peter A. Hancock. 2017. On the Nature of Vigilance. Human Factors 59, 1 (Feb. 2017), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816655240
[25]
Peter A. Hancock, Deborah R. Billings, Kristin E. Schaefer, Jessie Y. C. Chen, Ewart J. de Visser, and Raja Parasuraman. 2011. A Meta-Analysis of Factors Affecting Trust in Human-Robot Interaction. Human Factors 53, 5 (Oct. 2011), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811417254
[26]
Peter A. Hancock, Theresa T. Kessler, Alexandra D. Kaplan, John C. Brill, and James L. Szalma. 2021. Evolving Trust in Robots: Specification Through Sequential and Comparative Meta-Analyses. Human Factors 63, 7 (Nov. 2021), 1196–1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820922080
[27]
Kevin Anthony Hoff and Masooda Bashir. 2015. Trust in Automation: Integrating Empirical Evidence on Factors That Influence Trust. Human Factors 57, 3 (May 2015), 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
[28]
Shanee Honig and Tal Oron-Gilad. 2018. Understanding and Resolving Failures in Human-Robot Interaction: Literature Review and Model Development. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (June 2018). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00861 Publisher: Frontiers.
[29]
Sarah Hopko, Jingkun Wang, and Ranjana Mehta. 2022. Human Factors Considerations and Metrics in Shared Space Human-Robot Collaboration: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 9 (Feb. 2022). https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.799522 Publisher: Frontiers.
[30]
Dawn Iacobucci, Deidre L. Popovich, Sangkil Moon, and Sergio Román. 2023. How to calculate, use, and report variance explained effect size indices and not die trying. Journal of Consumer Psychology 33, 1 (2023), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1292
[31]
Robert S Kennedy, Norman E Lane, Kevin S Berbaum, and Michael G Lilienthal. 1993. Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The international journal of aviation psychology 3, 3 (1993), 203–220.
[32]
Zahra Rezaei Khavas, S. Reza Ahmadzadeh, and Paul Robinette. 2020. Modeling Trust in Human-Robot Interaction: A Survey. In Social Robotics, Alan R. Wagner, David Feil-Seifer, Kerstin S. Haring, Silvia Rossi, Thomas Williams, Hongsheng He, and Shuzhi Sam Ge (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 529–541. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_44
[33]
Jacob R. Kintz, Neil T. Banerjee, Johnny Y. Zhang, Allison P. Anderson, and Torin K. Clark. 2023. Estimation of Subjectively Reported Trust, Mental Workload, and Situation Awareness Using Unobtrusive Measures. Human Factors 65, 6 (Sept. 2023), 1142–1160. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208221129371
[34]
Spencer C. Kohn, Ewart J. de Visser, Eva Wiese, Yi-Ching Lee, and Tyler H. Shaw. 2021. Measurement of Trust in Automation: A Narrative Review and Reference Guide. Frontiers in Psychology 12 (2021).
[35]
Levi Kumle, Melissa L.-H. Võ, and Dejan Draschkow. 2021. Estimating power in (generalized) linear mixed models: An open introduction and tutorial in R. Behavior Research Methods 53, 6 (Dec. 2021), 2528–2543. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01546-0
[36]
Jieun Lee, Genya Abe, Kenji Sato, Makoto Itoh, University of Tsukuba 1-1-1 Tennodai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8573, Japan, and Japanese Automobile Research Institute 2530 Karima, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0822, Japan. 2020. Effects of Demographic Characteristics on Trust in Driving Automation. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics 32, 3 (June 2020), 605–612. https://doi.org/10.20965/jrm.2020.p0605
[37]
John Lee and Neville Moray. 1992. Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics 35, 10 (Oct. 1992), 1243–1270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139208967392
[38]
John D. Lee and Katrina A. See. 2004. Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance. Human Factors 46, 1 (March 2004), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392
[39]
Jason Y. Lee, Phillip Mucksavage, David C. Kerbl, Victor B. Huynh, Mohamed Etafy, and Elspeth M. McDougall. 2012. Validation Study of a Virtual Reality Robotic Simulator—Role as an Assessment Tool?The Journal of Urology 187, 3 (March 2012), 998–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.160
[40]
Mengyao Li, Isabel M Erickson, Ernest V Cross, and John D Lee. 2023. It’s Not Only What You Say, But Also How You Say It: Machine Learning Approach to Estimate Trust from Conversation. Human Factors (April 2023), 00187208231166624. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231166624
[41]
Mengyao Li, Amudha V. Kamaraj, and John D. Lee. 2023. Modeling Trust Dimensions and Dynamics in Human-Agent Conversation: A Trajectory Epistemic Network Analysis Approach. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 0, 0 (2023), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2201555
[42]
Oliver Liu, Daniel Rakita, Bilge Mutlu, and Michael Gleicher. 2017. Understanding human-robot interaction in virtual reality. In 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). 751–757. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172387 ISSN: 1944-9437.
[43]
Yugang Liu and Goldie Nejat. 2013. Robotic Urban Search and Rescue: A Survey from the Control Perspective. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 72, 2 (Nov. 2013), 147–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-013-9822-x
[44]
Martina Mara, Kathrin Meyer, Michael Heiml, Horst Pichler, Roland Haring, Brigitte Krenn, Stephanie Gross, Bernhard Reiterer, and Thomas Layer-Wagner. 2021. CoBot Studio VR: A Virtual Reality Game Environment for Transdisciplinary Research on Interpretability and Trust in Human-Robot Collaboration.
[45]
Robert McGrath and Gregory Meyer. 2006. When Effect Sizes Disagree: The Case of r and d. Psychological methods 11 (Dec. 2006), 386–401. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.386
[46]
Andrea Moglia, Vincenzo Ferrari, Luca Morelli, Mauro Ferrari, Franco Mosca, and Alfred Cuschieri. 2016. A Systematic Review of Virtual Reality Simulators for Robot-assisted Surgery. European Urology 69, 6 (June 2016), 1065–1080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.09.021
[47]
Shinichi Nakagawa and Holger Schielzeth. 2013. A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4, 2 (2013), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
[48]
Brian Oakley, Mustapha Mouloua, and Peter Hancock. 2003. Effects of Automation Reliability on Human Monitoring Performance. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 47, 1 (Oct. 2003), 188–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120304700139
[49]
Raja Parasuraman and Victor Riley. 1997. Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39, 2 (June 1997), 230–253. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886
[50]
Luis Pérez, Eduardo Diez, Rubén Usamentiaga, and Daniel F. García. 2019. Industrial robot control and operator training using virtual reality interfaces. Computers in Industry 109 (Aug. 2019), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2019.05.001
[51]
Paul Robinette, Ayanna M. Howard, and Alan R. Wagner. 2017. Effect of Robot Performance on Human–Robot Trust in Time-Critical Situations. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 47, 4 (Aug. 2017), 425–436. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2017.2648849
[52]
Gideon Schwarz. 1978. Estimating the Dimension of a Model. The Annals of Statistics 6, 2 (1978), 461–464.
[53]
Walter W Stroup. 2012. Generalized linear mixed models: modern concepts, methods and applications. CRC press.
[54]
Ningyuan Sun and Jean Botev. 2021. Intelligent autonomous agents and trust in virtual reality. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 4 (Aug. 2021), 100146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100146
[55]
Daniel Szafir. 2019. Mediating Human-Robot Interactions with Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality. In Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Applications and Case Studies, Jessie Y.C. Chen and Gino Fragomeni (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 124–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21565-1_9
[56]
Xinxing Tang and Hironao Yamada. 2011. Tele-operation Construction Robot Control System with Virtual Reality Technology. Procedia Engineering 15 (Jan. 2011), 1071–1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.08.198
[57]
Nathan Tenhundfeld, Mustafa Demir, and Ewart de Visser. 2022. Assessment of Trust in Automation in the “Real World”: Requirements for New Trust in Automation Measurement Techniques for Use by Practitioners. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making 16, 2 (June 2022), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434221096261
[58]
Fang-Wu Tung. 2011. Influence of Gender and Age on the Attitudes of Children towards Humanoid Robots. In Human-Computer Interaction. Users and Applications, Julie A. Jacko (Ed.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 637–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21619-0_76
[59]
Rik van den Brule, Ron Dotsch, Gijsbert Bijlstra, Daniel H. J. Wigboldus, and Pim Haselager. 2014. Do Robot Performance and Behavioral Style affect Human Trust?International Journal of Social Robotics 6, 4 (Nov. 2014), 519–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0231-5
[60]
Wietse van Dijk, Saskia J. Baltrusch, Ezra Dessers, and Michiel P. de Looze. 2023. The effect of human autonomy and robot work pace on perceived workload in human-robot collaborative assembly work. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 10 (Nov. 2023). https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2023.1244656
[61]
Oleksandra Vereschak, Gilles Bailly, and Baptiste Caramiaux. 2021. How to Evaluate Trust in AI-Assisted Decision Making? A Survey of Empirical Methodologies. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW2 (Oct. 2021), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3476068
[62]
Robert Whelan. 2008. Effective Analysis of Reaction Time Data. The Psychological Record 58, 3 (July 2008), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03395630
[63]
Anqi Xu and Gregory Dudek. 2016. Towards Modeling Real-Time Trust in Asymmetric Human–Robot Collaborations. In Robotics Research: The 16th International Symposium ISRR, Masayuki Inaba and Peter Corke (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, 113–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28872-7_7
[64]
Xiliu Yang, Aimée Sousa Calepso, Felix Amtsberg, Achim Menges, and Michael Sedlmair. 2023. Usability Evaluation of an Augmented Reality System for Collaborative Fabrication between Multiple Humans and Industrial Robots. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Symposium on Spatial User Interaction(SUI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3607822.3614528
[65]
X. Jessie Yang, Christopher Schemanske, and Christine Searle. 2023. Toward Quantifying Trust Dynamics: How People Adjust Their Trust After Moment-to-Moment Interaction With Automation. Human Factors 65, 5 (2023), 862–878. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208211034716
Index Terms
- Difficulties in Perceiving and Understanding Robot Reliability Changes in a Sequential Binary Task
Recommendations
Toward an Understanding of Trust Repair in Human-Robot Interaction: Current Research and Future Directions
Gone are the days of robots solely operating in isolation, without direct interaction with people. Rather, robots are increasingly being deployed in environments and roles that require complex social interaction with humans. The implementation of human-...
Human-Robot Trust: Just a Button Press Away
HRI '17: Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot InteractionMany of the benefits promised by human-robot interaction require successful continued interaction between a human and a robot; trust is a key component of such interaction. We investigate whether having a person "n the loop" with a robot---i.e., the ...
Robot Trustworthiness: Guidelines for Simulated Emotion
HRI'15 Extended Abstracts: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Extended AbstractsWell-justified human evaluations of autonomous robot trustworthiness require evidence from a variety of sources, including observation of robot behavior. Displays of affect by a robot that reflect important internal states not otherwise overtly visible ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
October 2024
396 pages
ISBN:9798400710889
DOI:10.1145/3677386
Copyright © 2024 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 07 October 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- Office of Naval Research
- AdventHealth Endowed Chair in Healthcare Simulation
Conference
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 86 of 279 submissions, 31%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 39Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)39
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 12 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format