Effects of Social Factors and Team Dynamics on Adoption of Collaborative Robot Autonomy

As automation becomes more prevalent, the fear of job loss due to automation increases [22]. Workers may not be amenable to working with a robotic co-worker due to a negative perception of the technology. The attitudes of workers towards automation are influenced by a variety of complex and multi-faceted factors such as intention to use, perceived usefulness and other external variables [15]. In an analog manufacturing environment, we explore how these various factors influence an individual's willingness to work with a robot over a human co-worker in a collaborative Lego building task. We specifically explore how this willingness is affected by: 1) the level of social rapport established between the individual and his or her human co-worker, 2) the anthropomorphic qualities of the robot, and 3) factors including trust, fluency and personality traits. Our results show that a participant's willingness to work with automation decreased due to lower perceived team fluency (p=0.045), rapport established between a participant and their co-worker (p=0.003), the gender of the participant being male (p=0.041), and a higher inherent trust in people (p=0.018).

[1]  Matthew Gombolay,et al.  Effects of Anthropomorphism and Accountability on Trust in Human Robot Interaction , 2020, 2020 15th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[2]  Ho Chit Siu,et al.  Comparative Performance of Human and Mobile Robotic Assistants in Collaborative Fetch-and-Deliver Tasks , 2014, 2014 9th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[3]  Kerstin Eder,et al.  Effects of Faults, Experience, and Personality on Trust in a Robot Co-Worker , 2017, ArXiv.

[4]  L. McKay Overcoming resistance to change. , 1993, Canadian journal of nursing administration.

[5]  Gene M. Alarcon,et al.  The effect of propensity to trust and perceptions of trustworthiness on trust behaviors in dyads , 2017, Behavior Research Methods.

[6]  Stav Fainshmidt,et al.  Development and validation of a propensity to trust scale , 2013 .

[7]  Sonia Chernova,et al.  Human Trust After Robot Mistakes: Study of the Effects of Different Forms of Robot Communication , 2019, 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[8]  Demetra Evangelou,et al.  Orientations and motivations: Are you a “people person,” a “thing person,” or both? , 2012 .

[9]  Dennis Kira,et al.  Managers' perceptions towards automation in manufacturing , 1990 .

[10]  Scott C. Roesch,et al.  Testing the latent factor structure and construct validity of the Ten-Item Personality Inventory , 2009 .

[11]  Julie A. Shah,et al.  Decision-making authority, team efficiency and human worker satisfaction in mixed human–robot teams , 2015, Auton. Robots.

[12]  Florence March,et al.  2016 , 2016, Affair of the Heart.

[13]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  User Acceptance Enablers in Individual Decision Making About Technology: Toward an Integrated Model , 2002, Decis. Sci..

[14]  J. Massen,et al.  Close social associations in animals and humans : functions and mechanisms of friendship , 2010 .

[15]  Julie A. Shah,et al.  Computational design of mixed-initiative human–robot teaming that considers human factors: situational awareness, workload, and workflow preferences , 2017, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[16]  P. Wong,et al.  Automation and organizational performance: The case of electronics manufacturing firms in Singapore , 1997 .

[17]  Guy Hoffman,et al.  Evaluating Fluency in Human–Robot Collaboration , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[18]  Allison Sauppé,et al.  The Social Impact of a Robot Co-Worker in Industrial Settings , 2015, CHI.

[19]  Impact of Faculty Student Rapport on Classroom Environment , 2019, Asian Journal of Interdisciplinary Research.

[20]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to assess automation , 2011, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[21]  Katherine J. Kuchenbecker,et al.  Designing and Assessing Expressive Open-Source Faces for the Baxter Robot , 2016, ICSR.

[22]  Alexander Maedche,et al.  The Impact of Anthropomorphic and Functional Chatbot Design Features in Enterprise Collaboration Systems on User Acceptance , 2019, Wirtschaftsinformatik.

[23]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Measurement Instruments for the Anthropomorphism, Animacy, Likeability, Perceived Intelligence, and Perceived Safety of Robots , 2009, Int. J. Soc. Robotics.

[24]  Alain Goudey,et al.  Must smart objects look human? Study of the impact of anthropomorphism on the acceptance of companion robots , 2016 .

[25]  J. Chelliah Will artificial intelligence usurp white collar jobs , 2017 .

[26]  Cristian Secchi,et al.  TIREBOT: A collaborative robot for the tire workshop , 2019 .

[27]  Lionel P. Robert,et al.  Human–Robot Similarity and Willingness to Work with a Robotic Co-worker , 2018, 2018 13th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[28]  William N. Dudley,1,et al.  An Introduction to Survival Statistics: Kaplan-Meier Analysis , 2016, Journal of the Advanced Practitioner in Oncology.

[29]  Michael Johnson,et al.  Four Years in Review: Statistical Practices of Likert Scales in Human-Robot Interaction Studies , 2020, HRI.

[30]  F. Erdem,et al.  Context-Specific Dimensions of Trust in Manager, Subordinate and Co-Worker in Organizations , 2014 .

[31]  Peter Robinson,et al.  How anthropomorphism affects empathy toward robots , 2009, 2009 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[32]  William N Dudley,et al.  An Introduction to Survival Statistics: Kaplan-Meier Analysis. , 2016, Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology.

[33]  H. Riess The Science of Empathy , 2017, Journal of patient experience.

[34]  P. Ilmakunnas,et al.  The Job Satisfaction-Productivity Nexus: A Study Using Matched Survey and Register Data , 2010 .