Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
International Journal of Social Robotics
Erschienen in: International Journal of Social Robotics 2/2016

01.04.2016

The Development of a Scale to Evaluate Trust in Industrial Human-robot Collaboration

verfasst von: George Charalambous, Sarah Fletcher, Philip Webb

Erschienen in: International Journal of Social Robotics | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Trust has been identified as a key element for the successful cooperation between humans and robots. However, little research has been directed at understanding trust development in industrial human-robot collaboration (HRC). With industrial robots becoming increasingly integrated into production lines as a means for enhancing productivity and quality, it will not be long before close proximity industrial HRC becomes a viable concept. Since trust is a multidimensional construct and heavily dependent on the context, it is vital to understand how trust develops when shop floor workers interact with industrial robots. To this end, in this study a trust measurement scale suitable for industrial HRC was developed in two phases. In phase one, an exploratory study was conducted to collect participants’ opinions qualitatively. This led to the identification of trust related themes relevant to the industrial context and a related pool of questionnaire items was generated. In the second phase, three human-robot trials were carried out in which the questionnaire items were applied to participants using three different types of industrial robots. The results were statistically analysed to identify the key factors impacting trust and from these generate a trust measurement scale for industrial HRC.
Vorheriger Artikel Development of a Socially Interactive System with Whole-Body Movements for BHR-4
Nächster Artikel Robovie as a Mascot: A Qualitative Study for Long-Term Presence of Robots in a Shopping Mall

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Ding Z, Hon B (2013) Constraints analysis and evaluation of manual assembly. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 62(1):1–4CrossRef
2.
Hägele M, Schaaf W, Helms E (2002) Robot assistants at manual workplaces: Effective co-operation and safety aspects. International symposium on robotics ISR 2002 / CD-ROM. October 7–11, Stockholm
3.
Schraft RD, Meyer C, Parlitz C, Helms E (2005) Powermate—a safe and intuitive robot assistant for handling and assembly tasks. IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, IEEE, Barcelona, pp 4047–4079
4.
Santis AD, Siciliano B, Luca AD, Bicchi A (2008) Atlas of physical human-robot interaction. Mech Mach Theor 43(3):253–270CrossRefMATH
5.
Unhelkar VV, Siu HC, Shah JA (2014) Comparative performance on human and mobile robotic assistants in collaborative fetch-and-deliver tasks. Human Robot interaction 2014. ACM, Bielefeld
6.
ISO (2011) Robots and robotic devices-safety requirements for industrial robots, Part 1: robots. international standards organisation, Geneva
7.
Bortot D, Born M, Bengler K (2013) Directly or detours? How should industrial robots approach humans?. ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI 2013), IEEE, Tokyo
8.
Walton M, Webb P, Poad M (2011) Applying a concept for robot-human cooperation to aerospace equipping processes, SAE International
9.
Parasuraman R, Riley V (1997) Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Hum Fact 39(2):230–253CrossRef
10.
Freedy A, de Visser E, Weltman G, Coeyman N (2007) Measurement of trust in human-robot collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 2007 international conference on collaborative technologies and systems, Orland
11.
Chen JY, Barnes MJ (2014) Human-agent teaming for multirobot control: a review of human factors issues. IEEE Trans Hum Mach Syst 44(1):13–29 IEEECrossRef
12.
Groom V, Nass C (2007) Can robots be teammates? Benchmarks in human–robot teams. Interact Stud 8(3):483–500
13.
Park E, Jenkins Q, Jiang X (2008) Measuring trust of human pperators in new generation rescue robots. Proceedings of the 7th JFPS international symposium on fluid power, Toyom, pp 15–18
14.
de Visser EJ, Parasuraman R, Freedy A, Freedy E, Weltman G (2006) A comprehensive methodology for assessing human-robot team Performance for use in training and simulation. Proceedings of the 50th Human factors ergonomics society, San Francisco, pp 2639–2643
15.
Lee JD, See KA (2004) Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum Fact 46(1):50–80CrossRef
16.
Verberne F, Ham J, Midden C (2012) Trust in smart systems: sharing driving goals and giving information to increase trustworthiness and acceptability of smart systems in cars. Hum Fact 54(5):799–810CrossRef
17.
Mazney D, Reichenbach J, Onnasch L (2012) Human performance consequences of automated decision aids: the impact of degree of automation and system experience. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 6(1):57–87CrossRef
18.
Parasuraman R, Molloy R, Singh I (1993) Performance consequences of automation-induced ‘complacency’. Int J Aviat Psychol 3(1):1–23CrossRef
19.
Dzindolet MT, Pierce LG, Beck HP, Dawe LA, Anderson WB (2001b) Predicting misuse and disuse of combat identification systems. Mil Psychol 13(3):147–164CrossRef
20.
de Visser E, Krueger F, McKnight P, Scheid S, Smith M, Chalk S et al. (2012) The world is not enough: trust in cognitive agents. In: Proceedings of the 56th annual HFES meeting, pp 263–267
21.
Chen JY, Barnes MJ (2012) Supervisory control of multiple robots: effects of imperfect automation and individual differences. Hum Fact 54(2):157–174CrossRef
22.
Desai M, Stubbs K, Steinfeld A, Yanco H (2009) Creating trustworthy robots: lessons and inspirations from automated systems. Paper presented at The AISB convention: new frontiers in human-robot interaction. Edinburgh
23.
Yagoda RE, Gillan DJ (2012) You want me to trust a ROBOT? The development of a human-robot interaction trust scale. Int J Soc Robot 4(3):235–248CrossRef
24.
Hancock PA, Billings DR, Oleson KE, Chen JY, De Visser E, Parasuraman R (2011) A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of human-robot trust. Aberdeen proving ground, MD 21005-5425: US Army Research Laboratory
25.
Singh IL, Molloy R, Parasuraman R (1993) Automation-induced “complacency”: development of a complacency-potential rating scale. Int J Aviat Psychol 3(2):111–122CrossRef
26.
Muir BM, Moray N (1996) Trust in automation. Part 1. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics 39(3):429–460CrossRef
27.
Jian X, Bisantz AM, Drury CG (2000) Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. Int J Cognit Ergon 4(1):53–71CrossRef
28.
Master R, Gramopadhye AK, Melloy BJ, Bingham J, Jiang X (2000) A questionnaire for measuring trust in hybrid inspection systems. Paper presented at the industrial engineering research conference. Dallas
29.
Schaefer KE (2013) The perception and measurement of human-robot trust. Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida
30.
King N (1998) Template analysis. In: Gillian S, Catherine C (eds) Qualitative methods and analysis in organizational research: a practical guide. Sage Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, pp 118–134
31.
Nunnally JC (1978) Psychometric theory, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
32.
Kline TJB (2005) Psychological testing: a practical approach to design and testing. Sage Publications Inc, London
33.
Lowenthal KM (1996) An introduction to psychological tests and scales. UCL Press, London
34.
Harris D, Chan-Pensley J, McGarry S (2005) The development of a multidimensional scale to evaluate motor vehicle dynamic qualities. Ergonomics 48(8):964–982CrossRef
35.
Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1998) Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
36.
37.
Kline P (1999) The handbook of psychological testing, 2nd edn. Routledge, London
38.
deVellis RF (1991) Scale development: theory and application. Sage Publishing, Newbury Park
39.
Bartneck C, Kulic D, Croft E (2009) Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int J Soc Robot 1:71–81CrossRef
40.
Inoue K, Nonaka S, Ujiie Y, Takubo T, Arai T (2005) Comparison of human psychology for real and virtual mobile manipulators. IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, ROMAN 2005, IEEE, pp 73–78
41.
Huber M, Rickert M, Knoll A, Brandt T, Glasauer S (2008) Human-robot interaction in handing-over tasks. 17th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication, pp 107–112
42.
Mayer MP, Kuz S, Schlick CM (2013) Using anthropomorphism to improve the human-machine interaction in industrial environments (part II). In: Duffy VG (ed) Digital human modeling and applications in health, safety, ergonomics, and risk management. Human body modelling and ergonomics. Springer, Berlin, pp 93–100CrossRef
43.
Broadbent E, Stafford R, MacDonald B (2009) Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: review and future directions. Int J Soc Robot 1(4):319–330CrossRef
44.
Bartneck C, Kanda T, Mubin O, Mahmud AA (2009) Does the design of a robot influence its animacy and perceived intelligence? Int J Soc Robot 1(2):195–204CrossRef
45.
Li D, Rau PL, Li Y (2010) A cross-cultural study: effect of robot appearance and task. Int J Soc Robot 2(2):175–186CrossRef
46.
Shiomi M, Zanlungo F, Hayashi K, Kanda T (2014) Towards a socially acceptable collision avoidance for a mobile robot navigating among pedestrians using a pedestrian model. Int J Soc Robot 6(3):443–455CrossRef
47.
van den Brule R, Dotsch R, Bijlstra G, Wigboldus DH, Haselager P (2014) Do robot performance and behavioral style affect human trust? Int J Soc Robot 6(4):519–531CrossRef
48.
Rosenthal-von der Pütten AM et al, Krämer NC (2015) Individuals’ evaluations of and attitudes towards potentially uncanny robots. Int J Soc Robot 7(5):1–26
49.
Prakash A, Rogers WA (2014) Why some humanoid faces are perceived more positively than others: effects of human-likeness and task. Int J Soc Robot 7(2):309–331CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The Development of a Scale to Evaluate Trust in Industrial Human-robot Collaboration
verfasst von
George Charalambous
Sarah Fletcher
Philip Webb
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2016
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
International Journal of Social Robotics / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 1875-4791
Elektronische ISSN: 1875-4805
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0333-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

International Journal of Social Robotics 2/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Survey

A Survey of Using Vocal Prosody to Convey Emotion in Robot Speech

OriginalPaper

Robovie as a Mascot: A Qualitative Study for Long-Term Presence of Robots in a Shopping Mall

OriginalPaper

R.U.R. Revisited: Perspectives and Reflections on Modern Robotics

OriginalPaper

Reciprocity in Human-Robot Interaction: A Quantitative Approach Through the Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Ultimatum Game

OriginalPaper

Optimisation of Reference Gait Trajectory of a Lower Limb Exoskeleton

OriginalPaper

Understanding Human Avoidance Behavior: Interaction-Aware Decision Making Based on Game Theory

Premium Partner

    Marktübersichten

    Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen. 

    Zur Marktübersicht
    Bildnachweise