Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) missions continue to benefit from the incorporation of human–robot teams (HRTs). USAR environments can be ambiguous, hazardous, and unstable. The integration of robot teammates into USAR missions has enabled human teammates to access areas of uncertainty, including hazardous locations. For HRTs to be effective, it is pertinent to understand the factors that influence team effectiveness, such as having shared goals, mutual understanding, and efficient communication. The purpose of our research is to determine how to (1) better establish human trust, (2) identify useful levels of robot transparency and robot explanations, (3) ensure situation awareness, and (4) encourage a bipartisan role amongst teammates. By implementing robot transparency and robot explanations, we found that the driving factors for effective HRTs rely on robot explanations that are context-driven and are readily available to the human teammate.
BartlettC. E.CookeN. J. (2015). Human-robot teaming in urban search and rescue. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59(1), 250–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591051
BreazealC.GrayJ.HoffmanG.BerlinM. (2004). Social Robots: Beyond tools to partners. In: 13th IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication. RO-MANIEEE Catalog No.04TH8759). https://doi.org/10.1109/roman.2004.1374820
BrysonJ. J.DiamantisM. E.GrantT. D. (2017). Of, for, and by the people: The legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(3), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.gdwpkq
6.
ChenJ. Y. C.BarnesM. J. (2014). Human–agent teaming for multirobot control: A review of human factors issues. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 44(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/thms.2013.2293535
7.
ChenJ. Y. C.LakhmaniS. G.StowersK.SelkowitzA. R.WrightJ. L.BarnesM. (2018). Situation Awareness-based agent transparency and human-autonomy teaming effectiveness. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 19(3), 259–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922x.2017.1315750
8.
ChenJ. Y. C.ProcciK.BoyceM.WrightJ.GarciaA.BarnesM. (2014). Situation awareness based agent transparency. In: Report No. ARL-TR-6905, aberdeen proving. U.S. Army Research Laboratory.
9.
ChiouE.DemirM.BuchananV.CorralC.EndsleyM. R.LemattaG.CookeN. J.McNeeseN. J.CouceiroM. S.PortugalD.RochaR. P.AraújoA. (2021). Explanation based communication strategies in a simulated human-robot search and rescue team taskInternational Journal of Social RoboticsFostering human–robot cooperative architectures for search and rescue missions in urban fires. Simulation, 97(3), 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549720964548
10.
ChiouE. K.LeeJ. D. (2021). Trusting automation: Designing for responsivity and resilience. Human Factors. https://doi.org/10.gjvcr2
11.
CookeN. J.GormanJ. C.MyersC. W.DuranJ. L. (2013). Interactive team cognition. Cognitive Science, 37(2), 255–285. https://doi.org/10.gf69qb
12.
EdmondsM.GaoF.LiuH.XieX.QiS.RothrockB.ZhuY.WuY.LuH.ZhuS. (2019). A tale of two explanations: Enhancing human trust by explaining robot behavior. Science Robotics, 4(37). https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aay4663
13.
EndsleyM. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(1), 32–64. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049543
14.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
15.
GreenwoodF.NelsonE. L.GreenoughP. G. (2020). Flying into the hurricane: A case study of UAV use in damage assessment during the 2017 hurricanes in Texas and Florida. Plos One, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227808
16.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in Psychology, 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9
17.
HongA.IgharoroO.LiuY.NirouiF.NejatG.BenhabibB. (2018). Investigating human-robot teams for learning-based semi-autonomous control in urban search and rescue environments. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 94(3–4), 669–686.
18.
HonigS.Oron-GiladT. (2021). Expect the unexpected: Leveraging the human-robot ecosystem to handle unexpected robot failures. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.656385
19.
HsiungC.-P.ChiouE. (2019). Attribution biases and trust development in physical human-machine coordination: Blaming yourself, your partner or an unexpected event. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 63(1), 211–211. https://doi.org/10.ghzbnz
20.
KhasawnehA.RogersH.BertrandJ.MadathilK. C.GramopadhyeA. (2019). Human adaptation to latency in teleoperated multi-robot human-agent search and Rescue Teams. Automation in Construction, 99, 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.12.012
21.
LakhmaniS.AbichJ.BarberD.ChenJ. (2016). A proposed approach for determining the influence of multimodal robot-of-human transparency information on human-agent teams. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Foundations of Augmented Cognition: Neuroergonomics and Operational Neuroscience, 296–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39952-2_29
22.
LeeJ. D.SeeK. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392
LyonsJ. B. (2013). Being transparent about transparency: A model for human-robot interaction. AAAI spring symposium series.
25.
MercadoJ. E.RuppM. A.ChenJ. Y. C.BarnesM. J.BarberD.ProcciK. (2016). Intelligent agent transparency in human–agent teaming for multi-UxV management. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 58(3), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815621206
PhillipsE.OsoskyS.GroveJ.JentschF. (2011). From tools to teammates: Toward the development of appropriate mental models for intelligent robots. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 55(1), 1491–1495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181311551310
29.
RousseauD. M.SitkinS. B.BurtR. S.CamererC. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393–404.
30.
SchaeferK. E. (2016). Measuring trust in human robot interactions: Development of the “trust perception scale-HRI”. In: Robust intelligence and trust in autonomous systems (pp. 191–218). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7668-0_10
31.
SelkowitzA. R.LariosC. A.LakhmaniS. G.ChenJ. Y. (2016). Displaying information to support transparency for autonomous platforms. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41959-6_14
32.
ShahJ.BreazealC. (2010). An empirical analysis of team coordination behaviors and action planning with application to human–robot teaming. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 52(2), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720809350882
33.
WangN.PynadathD. V.RoviraE.BarnesM. J.HillS. G. (2018). Is it my looks? Or something I said? The impact of explanations, embodiment, and expectations on trust and performance in human-robot teams. Persuasive Technology Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78978-1_5
34.
WongM.EzenyilimbaA.WolffA.AndersonT.ChiouE.DemirM.CookeN. J. (2021). A remote synthetic testbed development for human-robot teaming: An iterative design process during the COVID-19 pandemic. 65th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
35.
YagodaR. E.GillanD. J. (2012). You want me to trust a ROBOT? The development of a human–robot interaction trust scale. International Journal of Social Robotics, 4(3), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-012-0144-0
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
