Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Trust in Human-Autonomy Teaming: A Review of Trust Research from the US Army Research Laboratory Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems (AHFE 2018)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 784))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Trust is paramount to the development of effective human-robot teaming. It becomes even more important as robotic systems evolve to make both independent and interdependent decisions in high-risk, dynamic environments. Yet, despite decades of research looking at trust in human-interpersonal teams, human-animal teams, and human-automation interaction, there are still a number of critical research gaps related to human-robot trust. The US Army Research Laboratory Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance (RCTA) is a 10-year program with government, industry and academia combining to conduct collaborative research across four major robotic technical areas of intelligence, perception, human-robot interaction, and manipulation and mobility. This paper describes findings from over 60 publications and 49 presentations describing research conducted as part of the RCTA from 2010 to 2017 to address these critical gaps on human-robot trust.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    More information about ARL’s past and current CTAs and CRAs are located on ARL’s website http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=93.

  2. 2.

    The biannual program plan is available at http://www.arl.army.mil/www/default.cfm?page=392.

References

  1. Goodrich, M.A., Schultz, A.C.: Human-robot interaction: a survey. Found. Trends Hum. Comput. Interact. 1(3), 203–275 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Scholtz, J.: Theory and evaluation of human robot interactions. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 10–19. IEEE, Big Island, HI (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Adams, B.D., Bruyn, L.E., Houde, S., Angelopoulos, P.: Trust in automated systems literature review (Report No. CR-2003-096). Department of National Defense, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E., Llorens, N., Hancock, P.A.: What is trust? defining the construct across domains. In: American Psychological Association Conference, Division 21, Orlando, FL (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schaefer, K.E.: The perception and measurement of human-robot trust. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2688. University of Central Florida, FL (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Phillips, E., Ososky, S., Jentsch, F.: An investigation of human decision-making in a human-robot team task. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 58(1), 315–319 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hancock, P.A., Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E.: Can you trust your robot? Ergon. Des. 19(3), 24–29 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hancock, P.A., Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y.C., Parasuraman, R., de Visser, E.: A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Hum. Factors 53(5), 517–527 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y.C., Szalma, J.L., Hancock, P.A.: A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of trust in automation: implications for understanding autonomy in future systems. Hum. Factors 58(3), 377–400 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Norman, D.A.: Some observations on mental models. In: Gentner, D., Stevens, A.L. (eds.) Mental Models, pp. 7–14. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Phillips, E., Ososky, S., Grove, J., Jentsch, F.: From tools to teammates: toward the development of appropriate mental models for intelligent robots. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 55(1), 1491–1495 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Carroll, J.M., Thomas, J.C.: Metaphor and the cognitive representation of computing systems. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 12(2), 107–116 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Schaefer, K.E., Sanders, T.L., Yordon, R.E., Billings, D.R., Hancock, P.A.: Classification of robot form: Factors predicting perceived trustworthiness. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 56, 1548–1552 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Schaefer, K.E., Billings, D.R., Hancock, P.A.: Robots vs. machines: identifying user perceptions and classifications. In: Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA), pp. 138–141. IEEE, New Orleans, LA (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Warta, S.F.: If a Robot did “the robot”, would it still be called “the robot” or just dancing? Perceptual and social factors in human-robot interactions. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 59(1), 796–800 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Schaefer, K.E., Adams, J.K., Cook, J.G., Bardwell-Owens, A., Hancock, P.A.: The future of robotic design: trends from the history of media representations. Ergon. Des. 23(1), 13–19 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ososky, S., Phillips, E., Schuster, D., Jentsch, F.: A picture is worth a thousand mental models. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 57(1), 1298–1302 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Perelman, B.S., Evans III, A.W., Schaefer, K.E.: Mental model consensus and shifts during navigation system-assisted route planning. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 61(1), 1183–1187 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cannon-Bowers, J.A., Salas, E., Converse, S.: Shared mental models in expert team decision making. In: Castellan, N.J. (ed.) Current Issues in Individual and Group Decision Making, pp. 221–246. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Mathieu, J.E., Heffner, T.S., Goodwin, G.F., Salas, E., Cannon-Bowers, J.: Influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 85(2), 273–283 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ososky, S., Schuster, D., Jentsch, F., et al.: The importance of shared mental models and shared situation awareness for transforming robots from tools to teammates. In: XIV SPIE Unmanned Systems Technology (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Endsley, M.R.: The application of human factors to the development of expert systems for advanced cockpits. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 13, 1388–1392 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Endsley, M.R.: From here to autonomy: lessons learned from human-automation research. Hum. Factors 59(1), 5–27 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Endsley, M.R.: Autonomous horizons: system autonomy in the air force – a path to the future (AF/ST TR 15-01), volume 1 Human-Autonomy Teaming. Department of the Air Force, Washington, DC (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Schuster, D.A.: The effects of diagnostic aiding on situation awareness under robot unreliability. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. University of Central Florida, FL (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Endsley,M.R., Jones, W.M.: Situation awareness information dominance & information warfare (AL/CF-TR-1997-0156). US Air Force Armstrong Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y.C., Wright, J., Aksaray, D., Roy, N.: Challenges with incorporating context into human-robot teaming (TR-SS-17-03). In: AAAI Spring Symposium Series, pp. 347–350. AAAI Publications, Stanford, CA (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Schaefer, K.E., Aksaray, D., Wright, J.L., Chen, J.Y.C., Roy, N.: Challenges with addressing the issue of context within AI and human-robot teaming. In: Lawless, W., Mittu, R., Sofge, D. (eds.) Computational Context: The Value, Theory and Application of Context with AI. Springer (In Press)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Schaefer, K.E., Perelman, B.S., Brewer, R.W., Wright, J., Roy, N., Aksaray, D.: Quantifying human decision-making: implications for bidirectional communication in human-robot teams. In: Human-Computer Interaction International, Las Vegas, NV (2018)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Kadushin, C.: Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts, and Findings. Oxford University Press, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Azien, I.: The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 179–211 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schaefer, K.E., Brewer, R., Putney, J., Mottern, E., Barghout, J., Straub, E.R.: Relinquishing manual control: Collaboration requires the capability to understand robot intent. In: International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems, pp. 359–366. IEEE, Orlando, FL (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schaefer, K.E., Straub, E.R., Chen, J.Y.C., Putney, J., Evans, A.W.: Communicating intent to develop shared situation awareness and engender trust in human-agent teams. Cogn. Syst. Res.: Special Issue on Situation Awareness in Human-Machine Interactive Systems 46, 26–39 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Straub, E.R., Schaefer, K.E.: It takes two to tango: Automated vehicles and human beings do the dance of driving – Four social considerations for policy. Transportation Part A: Policy and Practice, Special Issue on Autonomous Vehicle Policy. Elsevier (In Press)

    Google Scholar 

  35. U.S. Department of the Army: Visual Signals Field Manual (FM 21-60) (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Elliott, L.R., Hill, S.G., Barnes, M.: Gesture-based controls for robots: overview and implications for use by Soldiers (ARL-TR-7715). MDUS Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mortimer, B.J.P., Elliott, L.R.: Identifying errors in tactile displays and best practice usage guidelines. In: Chen, J.Y.C. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, AHFE 2017, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 595, pp. 226–235. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Barber, D., Wohleber, R.W., Parchment, A., Jentsch, F., Elliott, L.: Development of a squad level vocabulary for human-robot interaction. In: Shumaker, R., Lackey, S. (eds.) Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments, pp. 139–148. Springer, Cham (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Duvallet, F., Walter, M.R., Howard, T., Hemachandra, S., Oh, J., Teller, S., Roy, N., Stentz, A.: Inferring maps and behaviors from natural language instructions. In: Experimental Robotics, pp. 373–388 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Barber, D., Abich IV, J., Phillips, E., Talone, A., Jentsch, F., Hill, S.: Field assessment of multimodal communication for dismounted human-robot teams. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 59(1), 921–925 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Barber, D.J., Howard, T.M., and Walter, M.R.: A multimodal interface for real-time soldier-robot teaming. In: SPIE International Society for Optics and Photonics, Baltimore MD (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Chen, J.Y.C., Procci, K., Boyce, M., Wright, J., Garcia, A., Barnes, M.: Situation awareness-based agent transparency (ARL-TR-6905). MDUS Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Grounds (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sanders, T.L., Wixon, T., Schafer, K.E., Chen, J.Y.C., Hancock, P.A.: The influence of modality and transparency on trust in human-robot interaction. In: Cognitive Methods in Situation Awareness and Decision Support (CogSIMA), pp. 156–159. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wright, J.L., Chen, J.Y.C., Barnes, M., Hancock, P.A.: Agent reasoning transparency: The influence of information level on automation-induced complacency (ARL-TR-8044). MDUS Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Wiltshire, T.J., Barber, D., Fiore, S.M.: Towards modeling social-cognitive mechanisms in robots to facilitate human-robot teaming. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 57(1), 1278–1282 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wiltshire, T.J., Fiore, S.M.: Social cognitive and affective neuroscience in human–machine systems: A roadmap for improving training, human–robot interaction, and team performance. IEEE Trans. Hum. Mach. Syst. 44(6), 779–787 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Fiore, S.M., Wiltshire, T.J., Lobato, E.J., Jentsch, F.G., Huang, W.H., Axelrod, B.: Toward understanding social cues and signals in human–robot interaction: effects of robot gaze and proxemic behavior. Front. Psychol. 4(859), 1–15 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  48. MacArthur, K.R., Stowers, K., Hancock, P.A.: Human-robot interaction: Proximity and speed – Slowly back away from the robot. In: Savage-Knepshield, P., Chen, J.Y.C. (eds.) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 499, pp. 365–374. Springer, Cham (2017)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  49. Wiltshire, T.J., Lobato, E.J., Garcia, D.R., Fiore, S.M., Jentsch, F.G., Huang, W.H., Axelrod, B.: Effects of robotic social cues on interpersonal attributions and assessments of robot interaction behaviors. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 59(1), 801–805 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. United States Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Aberdeen, MD, USA

    Kristin E. Schaefer & Susan G. Hill

  2. University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA

    Florian G. Jentsch

Authors
  1. Kristin E. Schaefer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan G. Hill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Florian G. Jentsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin E. Schaefer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Orlando, Florida, USA

    Jessie Chen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature (outside the USA)

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schaefer, K.E., Hill, S.G., Jentsch, F.G. (2019). Trust in Human-Autonomy Teaming: A Review of Trust Research from the US Army Research Laboratory Robotics Collaborative Technology Alliance. In: Chen, J. (eds) Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems. AHFE 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 784. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94346-6_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation