Trust as indicator of robot functional and social acceptance. An experimental study on user conformation to iCub answers

Abstract

International audienceTo investigate the dynamics of human-robot acceptance, we carried out an experimental study with 56 adult participants and the iCub robot. Trust in the robot has been considered as a main indicator of acceptance and measured by the participants' conformation to the iCub's answers to questions on functional and social tasks characterized by perceptual and socio cognitive uncertainty. In particular, we were interested in understanding whether (i) trust in functional savvy is a prerequisite for trust in social savvy, and (ii) to what extent factors such as participants' desire for control, attitude towards social influence of robots, and imagined collaborative vs. competitive scenario, may influence their trust in the iCub. We found that participants conformed more to the iCub's answers in the functional than in the social tasks. Moreover, the few participants conforming to the iCub's answers in the social task also conformed less in the functional issues. Trust in the robot's functional savvy does not thus seem to be a prerequisite for trust in its social savvy. Finally, the examined factors did not influence the trust in iCub. Results are discussed with relation to methodology of human-robot interaction (HRI) research

Humanoid Robot-Application and Influence

“…Adult female users' trust decreased when the robots constantly gazed at them [18]; however, users with lower confidence had more trust towards the robot [18]. Humanoid robots were trusted with their functional knowledge such as weight, size, color, and other quantitative measures, but users did not trust on social and logical knowledge such good, bad, and other qualitative measures given by the robot [11]. People also believe that humanoid robots take undesirable actions intentionally and are more prone to make an error [20].…”

“…Non-Clinical healthcare have significantly contributed to autism management followed by diabetes management [7] by performing activities such as playing games [8]- [10], greeting, singing, dancing, hand movement, blinking, interacting with the patients [2], [3], [11]- [13]. Robots also measured blood pressure [14]- [16] and asked questions, played a quiz with the patients [7] [17], monitored and helped patients with medical assistance [4].…”

“…Children and elderly users have a diverse opinion about the appearance of a robot. Some preferred humanoid whereas, some liked machine-like appearance [11]. Since humanoid robots look like a human, they are more relatable and a better fit for companionship [11] [49].…”

“…Some preferred humanoid whereas, some liked machine-like appearance [11]. Since humanoid robots look like a human, they are more relatable and a better fit for companionship [11] [49]. According to a literature review, people relate male humanoid robots as more intelligent in decision making, whereas; female robots were perceived to be good at nursing and caring activities [11].…”

“…Since humanoid robots look like a human, they are more relatable and a better fit for companionship [11] [49]. According to a literature review, people relate male humanoid robots as more intelligent in decision making, whereas; female robots were perceived to be good at nursing and caring activities [11]. Humanoid robots can also evoke the feeling of care and enhance awareness of social behavior [47].…”