Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3419249.3420087acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesnordichiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Adaptation and validation of the HCTM Scale into Human-robot interaction Portuguese context: A study of measuring trust in human-robot interactions

Published: 26 October 2020 Publication History

Abstract

As robots become increasingly common in a wide variety of domains, there is an increasing need to assess the trust humans have when interacting with robots. Specifically are two of the main objectives in this study: 1) to adapt and validate the Human-Computer Trust Model Scale (HCTM) to human-robot interaction (HRI), in a Portuguese population. This need is because trust in automation has been understood through its analogy to interpersonal trust. With the HCTM we intend to suggest an alternative to that. This measure of trust is a very recent scale, 2019, and based on the present context and research. More, this scale was subjected to robust statistical analysis tests and was tested at different scenarios of computing with successful. The final motive is that authors are not aware of a similar scale in the Portuguese context that can measure trust in HRI with COBOTS. The growth of this market is notable. For that, we used 243 undergraduate students with backgrounds on Management and Engineering and Industrial Management. Results, indicate a good measurement of the latent constructs, convergent reliability, internal consistency and discriminate validity. However, Dillon-Goldstein's rho measures for both Competency (0.696), Benevolence (0.686) and Reciprocity (0.604) constructs present scores close to 0.70. According to Hair et al [11] the composite reliability (internal consistency) should be higher than 0.7 (or >0.6 in exploratory research). This means that the model is acceptable, and the Portuguese version of the model satisfies the criteria for measure trust in human-robot interaction (HRI), however, have a poor internal consist.

References

[1]
Alberdi, E., Povyakalo, A., Strigini, L. and Ayton, P., 2004. Effects of incorrect computer-aided detection (CAD) output on human decision-making in mammography. Academic radiology, 11(8), pp.909-918.
[2]
Siddharth Gulati, Sonia Sousa, and David Lamas. 2019. Design, development and evaluation of a human-computer trust scale. Behav. Inf. Technol.
[3]
Manuela Magalhães and Andrew Hill. 2000. Investigação por questionário. Lisboa.
[4]
Jiun-Yin Jian, Ann M. Bisantz, and Colin G. Drury. 2000. Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems. Int. J. Cogn. Ergon.
[5]
Clare Kelly, M. Boardman, P. Goillau, and E. Jeannot. 2003. Guidelines for trust in future ATM systems: A literature review. Eur. AIR TRAFFIC Manag. Program.
[6]
Joseph B. Lyons and Charlene K. Stokes. 2012. Human-human reliance in the context of automation. Human Factors.
[7]
Madsen, M. and Gregor, S., 2000, December. Measuring human-computer trust. In 11th australasian conference on information systems (Vol. 53, pp. 6-8).
[8]
Roger C Mayer, James H. Davis, and F. David Schoorman. 1995. An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust. Acad. Manag. Rev.
[9]
Bonnie M. Muir and Neville Moray. 1996. Trust in automation. part ii. experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics.
[10]
Raja Parasuraman and Victor Riley. 1997. Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Hum. Factors.
[11]
Hair Jr, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C. and Sarstedt, M., 2016. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.
[12]
Hulland, J., 1999. Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal, 20(2), pp.195-204.
[13]
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y., 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), pp.74-94.
[14]
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F., 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Human-Centered Trustworthy Framework: A Human–Computer Interaction PerspectiveComputer10.1109/MC.2023.328756357:3(46-58)Online publication date: Mar-2024
  • (2024)How Does Trust in Simulations of Drone Failures Compare with Reality?2024 10th International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA)10.1109/ICARA60736.2024.10553061(305-310)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2024
  • (2023)Unmasking Trust: Examining Users' Perspectives of Facial Recognition Systems in MozambiqueProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3628096.3628746(38-43)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Adaptation and validation of the HCTM Scale into Human-robot interaction Portuguese context: A study of measuring trust in human-robot interactions
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      NordiCHI '20: Proceedings of the 11th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society
      October 2020
      1177 pages
      ISBN:9781450375795
      DOI:10.1145/3419249
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 26 October 2020

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Adaptation and validation
      2. COBOTS
      3. HRI
      4. Trust

      Qualifiers

      • Extended-abstract
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Funding Sources

      • NGI_TRUST

      Conference

      NordiCHI '20
      NordiCHI '20: Shaping Experiences, Shaping Society
      October 25 - 29, 2020
      Tallinn, Estonia

      Acceptance Rates

      NordiCHI '20 Paper Acceptance Rate 89 of 399 submissions, 22%;
      Overall Acceptance Rate 379 of 1,572 submissions, 24%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)96
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
      Reflects downloads up to 16 Nov 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Human-Centered Trustworthy Framework: A Human–Computer Interaction PerspectiveComputer10.1109/MC.2023.328756357:3(46-58)Online publication date: Mar-2024
      • (2024)How Does Trust in Simulations of Drone Failures Compare with Reality?2024 10th International Conference on Automation, Robotics and Applications (ICARA)10.1109/ICARA60736.2024.10553061(305-310)Online publication date: 22-Feb-2024
      • (2023)Unmasking Trust: Examining Users' Perspectives of Facial Recognition Systems in MozambiqueProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3628096.3628746(38-43)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2023
      • (2023)Human Trust After Drone Failure: Study of the Effects of Drone Type and Failure Type on Human-Drone Trust2023 20th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots (UR)10.1109/UR57808.2023.10202489(685-692)Online publication date: 25-Jun-2023
      • (2023)Towards Cross-Cultural Assessment of Trust in High-Risk AIHuman-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 202310.1007/978-3-031-42293-5_74(569-573)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2023
      • (2023)Trust in Facial Recognition Systems: A Perspective from the UsersHuman-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 202310.1007/978-3-031-42280-5_24(379-388)Online publication date: 25-Aug-2023
      • (2022)Modeling Trust in COVID-19 Contact-Tracing Apps Using the Human-Computer Trust Scale: Online Survey StudyJMIR Human Factors10.2196/339519:2(e33951)Online publication date: 13-Jun-2022
      • (2022)A Trust Scale for Human-Robot Interaction: Translation, Adaptation, and Validation of a Human Computer Trust ScaleHuman Behavior and Emerging Technologies10.1155/2022/64374412022(1-12)Online publication date: 16-Dec-2022
      • (2022)Human trust in otherware – a systematic literature review bringing all antecedents togetherErgonomics10.1080/00140139.2022.212063466:7(976-998)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2022
      • (2021)Factors Influencing Trust in WhatsApp: A Cross-Cultural StudyHCI International 2021 - Late Breaking Papers: Design and User Experience10.1007/978-3-030-90238-4_35(495-508)Online publication date: 20-Nov-2021
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media