This paper extends a taxonomy of humanrobot interaction (HRI) introduced in 2002 [1] to include additional categories as well as updates to the categories from the original taxonomy. New classifications include measures of the social nature of the task (human interaction roles and human-robot physical proximity), task type, and robot morphology.

Abstract-Prior work in human trust of autonomous robots suggests the timing of reliability drops impact trust and control allocation strategies. However, trust is traditionally measured post-run, thereby masking the real-time changes in trust, reducing sensitivity to factors like inertia, and subjecting the measure to biases like the primacy-recency effect. Likewise, little is known on how feedback of robot confidence interacts in real-time with trust and control allocation strategies. An experiment to examine these issues showed trust loss due to early reliability drops is masked in traditional post-run measures, trust demonstrates inertia, and feedback alters allocation strategies independent of trust. The implications of specific findings on development of trust models and robot design are also discussed.

Abstract

No abstract

Prior work in human-autonomy interaction has focused on plant systems that operate in highly structured environments. In contrast, many human-robot interaction (HRI) tasks are dynamic and unstructured, occurring in the open world. It is our belief that methods developed for the measurement and modeling of trust in traditional automation need alteration in order to be useful for HRI. Therefore, it is important to characterize the factors in HRI that influence trust. This study focused on the influence of changing autonomy reliability. Participants experienced a set of challenging robot handling scenarios that forced autonomy use and kept them focused on autonomy performance. The counterbalanced experiment included scenarios with different low reliability windows so that we could examine how drops in reliability altered trust and use of autonomy. Drops in reliability were shown to affect trust, the frequency and timing of autonomy mode switching, as well as participants' self-assessments of performance. A regression analysis on a number of robot, personal, and scenario factors revealed that participants tie trust more strongly to their own actions rather than robot performance.