Exploring Robot Acceptance Across Domains Considering Trust and Social Aspects: A Survey (original) (raw)
References
Danaher J (2019) The rise of the robots and the crisis of moral patiency. AI Soc 34(1):129–136 Google Scholar
Adell E, Várhelyi A, Nilsson L (2018) The definition of acceptance and acceptability. In: Driver acceptance of new technology, pp 11–22. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Kaplan F (2005) Everyday robotics: robots as everyday objects. In: Proceedings of the 2005 joint conference on smart objects and ambient intelligence: innovative context-aware services: usages and technologies, pp 59–64
Ikumapayi O, Akinlabi E, Onu P, Akinlabi S, Agarana M (2019) A generalized model for automation cost estimating systems (aces) for sustainable manufacturing. In: Journal of physics: conference series, vol 1378, p 032043. IOP Publishing
Castelfranchi C, Falcone R (2010) Socio-cognitive model of trust: basic ingredients. In: Trust theory: a socio-cognitive and computational model, pp 35–94. Wiley, online. Chap 2
Ashraf N, Bohnet I, Piankov N (2006) Decomposing trust and trustworthiness. Exp Econ 9:193–208 Google Scholar
Jones GR, George JM (1998) The experience and evolution of trust: implications for cooperation and teamwork. Acad Manag Rev 23(3):531–546 Google Scholar
Phillips E, Ullman D, Graaf MM, Malle BF (2017) What does a robot look like?: a multi-site examination of user expectations about robot appearance. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol 61, pp 1215–1219. SAGE Publications Sage, Los Angeles
Kok BC, Soh H (2020) Trust in robots: challenges and opportunities. Curr Robot Rep 1:297–309 Google Scholar
Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart 319–340
Bartneck C, Nomura T, Kanda T, Suzuki T, Kennsuke K (2005) A cross-cultural study on attitudes towards robots
Weng Y-H, Chen C-H, Sun C-T (2009) Toward the human-robot co-existence society: on safety intelligence for next generation robots. Int J Soc Robot 1:267–282 Google Scholar
Khavas ZR, Ahmadzadeh SR, Robinette P (2020) Modeling trust in human-robot interaction: a survey. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 529–541. Springer
Zacharaki A, Kostavelis I, Gasteratos A, Dokas I (2020) Safety bounds in human robot interaction: a survey. Saf Sci 127:104667 Google Scholar
Arents J, Greitans M (2022) Smart industrial robot control trends, challenges and opportunities within manufacturing. Appl Sci 12(2):937 Google Scholar
Muller-Abdelrazeq SL, Schonefeld K, Haberstroh M, Hees F (2019) Interacting with collaborative robots—a study on attitudes and acceptance in industrial contexts. Social robots: technological, societal and ethical aspects of human-robot interaction, pp 101–117
Li Y, Wang C (2022) Effect of customer’s perception on service robot acceptance. Int J Consum Stud 46(4):1241–1261 Google Scholar
Naneva S, Sarda Gou M, Webb TL, Prescott TJ (2020) A systematic review of attitudes, anxiety, acceptance, and trust towards social robots. Int J Soc Robot 12(6):1179–1201 Google Scholar
Sheridan TB (2020) A review of recent research in social robotics. Curr Opin Psychol 36:7–12 Google Scholar
Moberg R, Khan A (2022) Humanoid robot acceptance: a concise review of literature. In: 2022 international conference on computational science and computational intelligence (CSCI), pp 1223–1228 . IEEE
Jacob F, Grosse EH, Morana S, König CJ (2023) Picking with a robot colleague: a systematic literature review and evaluation of technology acceptance in human-robot collaborative warehouses. Comput Ind Eng 180:109262 Google Scholar
Savela N, Turja T, Oksanen A (2018) Social acceptance of robots in different occupational fields: a systematic literature review. Int J Soc Robot 10(4):493–502 Google Scholar
Kitchenham B, Charters S, et al (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering
Venkatesh V, Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Manag Sci 46(2):186–204 Google Scholar
Venkatesh V, Bala H (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis Sci 39(2):273–315 Google Scholar
Sung HJ, Jeon HM (2020) Untact: customer’s acceptance intention toward robot barista in coffee shop. Sustainability 12(20):8598 Google Scholar
Chatzopoulos A, Kalovrektis K, Xenakis A, Chondrogiannis E, Papoutsidakis M, Kalogiannakis M, Psycharis S (2022) Design and evaluation of a novel and modular educational robot platform based on technology acceptance model. In: Proceedings of seventh international congress on information and communication technology: ICICT 2022, London, Vol 1, pp 633–643. Springer
Schina D, Valls-Bautista C, Borrull-Riera A, Usart M, Esteve-González V (2021) An associational study: preschool teachers’ acceptance and self-efficacy towards educational robotics in a pre-service teacher training program. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 18:1–20 Google Scholar
Vänni KJ, Cabibihan J-J, Salin SE (2018) Attitudes of heads of education and directors of research towards the need for social robotics education in universities. In: Social robotics: 10th international conference, ICSR 2018, Qingdao, China, November 28–30, 2018, Proceedings 10, pp 472–482. Springer
Bröhl C, Nelles J, Brandl C, Mertens A, Nitsch V (2019) Human-robot collaboration acceptance model: development and comparison for Germany, Japan, China and the USA. Int J Soc Robot 11(5):709–726 Google Scholar
Kaye S-A, Li X, Oviedo-Trespalacios O, Afghari AP (2022) Getting in the path of the robot: pedestrians acceptance of crossing roads near fully automated vehicles. Travel Behav Soc 26:1–8 Google Scholar
Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the Almere model. Springer, Berlin Google Scholar
Felding SA, Koh WQ, Teupen S, Budak KB, Laporte Uribe F, Roes M (2023) A scoping review using the Almere model to understand factors facilitating and hindering the acceptance of social robots in nursing homes. Int J Soc Robot 1–39
Forgas-Coll S, Huertas-Garcia R, Andriella A, Alenyà G (2022) The effects of gender and personality of robot assistants on customers’ acceptance of their service. Serv Bus 16(2):359–389 Google Scholar
Forgas-Coll S, Huertas-Garcia R, Andriella A, Alenyà G (2023) Gendered human–robot interactions in services. Int J Soc Robot 1–17
Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quart 425–478
Han J, Conti D (2020) The use of utaut and post acceptance models to investigate the attitude towards a telepresence robot in an educational setting. Robotics 9(2):34 Google Scholar
Guggemos J, Seufert S, Sonderegger S (2020) Humanoid robots in higher education: evaluating the acceptance of pepper in the context of an academic writing course using the utaut. Br J Educ Technol 51(5):1864–1883 Google Scholar
Kraus J, Miller L, Klumpp M, Babel F, Scholz D, Merger J, Baumann M (2023) On the role of beliefs and trust for the intention to use service robots: an integrated trustworthiness beliefs model for robot acceptance. Int J Soc Robot 1–24
Mele C, Spena TR, Tregua M, Laddaga C, Ranieri A, Ruggiero A, Gargiulo R (2020) Understanding robot acceptance/rejection: the SAR model. In: 2020 29th IEEE international conference on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 470–475. IEEE
Fuentes-Moraleda L, Díaz-Pérez P, Orea-Giner A, Muñoz-Mazón A, Villacé-Molinero T (2020) Interaction between hotel service robots and humans: a hotel-specific service robot acceptance model (SRAM). Tour Manag Perspect 36:100751 Google Scholar
Fernandes T, Oliveira E (2021) Understanding consumers’ acceptance of automated technologies in service encounters: drivers of digital voice assistants adoption. J Bus Res 122:180–191 Google Scholar
Wirtz J, Patterson PG, Kunz WH, Gruber T, Lu VN, Paluch S, Martins A (2018) Brave new world: service robots in the frontline. J Serv Manag 29(5):907–931 Google Scholar
Čaić M, Odekerken-Schröder G, Mahr D (2018) Service robots: value co-creation and co-destruction in elderly care networks. J Serv Manag 29(2):178–205 Google Scholar
Subero-Navarro Á, Pelegrín-Borondo J, Reinares-Lara E, Olarte-Pascual C (2022) Proposal for modeling social robot acceptance by retail customers: can model+ technophobia. J Retail Consum Serv 64:102813 Google Scholar
Graaf MM, Ben Allouch S, Van Dijk JA (2019) Why would i use this in my home? A model of domestic social robot acceptance. Hum-Comput Interact 34(2):115–173 Google Scholar
Randall N, Kamino W, Joshi S, Chen W-C, Hsu L-J, Tsui KM, Šabanović S et al (2023) Understanding the connection among Ikigai, well-being, and home robot acceptance in Japanese older adults: mixed methods study. JMIR Aging 6(1):45442 Google Scholar
Lo C-M, Wang J-H, Wang H-W (2022) Virtual reality human-robot interaction technology acceptance model for learning direct current and alternating current. J Supercomput 78(13):15314–15337 Google Scholar
Kossewska J, Kłosowska J (2020) Acceptance of robot-mediated teaching and therapy for children with atypical development by polish professionals. J Policy Pract Intellect Disabil 17(1):21–30 Google Scholar
Abe S, Noguchi N, Matsuka Y, Shinohara C, Kimura T, Oka K, Okura K, Rodis OM, Kawano F (2018) Educational effects using a robot patient simulation system for development of clinical attitude. Eur J Dental Educ 22(3):327–336 Google Scholar
Cergol K, Karabin P (2022) Educational robots and flow experience. In: International conference on robotics in education (RiE), pp 3–14. Springer
Gonzalez-Espinoza C, Venzor-Mendoza A, Lasso-Lopez O, Lozoya C (2023) Educative impact of a remote laboratory to experience industrial robotics. In: 2023 IEEE international conference on teaching, assessment and learning for engineering (TALE), pp 1–5. IEEE
Zehnder E, Jouaiti M, Charpillet F (2022) Evaluating robot acceptance in children with asd and their parents. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 45–53. Springer
McDermott H, Choudhury N, Lewin-Runacres M, Aemn I, Moss E (2020) Gender differences in understanding and acceptance of robot-assisted surgery. J Robot Surg 14:227–232 Google Scholar
Mascret N, Temprado J-J (2023) Acceptance of a mobile telepresence robot, before use, to remotely supervise older adults’ adapted physical activity. Int J Environ Res Public Health 20(4):3012 Google Scholar
Park S, Park MK, Heo J, Hwang J-s, Hwang S, Kim D, Chung S-J, Kwak HS (2023) Robot versus human barista: comparison of volatile compounds and consumers’ acceptance, sensory profile, and emotional response of brewed coffee. Food Res Int 172:113119 Google Scholar
Dong Y (2021) Factors influencing service robot adoption: a comparative analysis of hotel-specific service robot acceptance models
Parvez MO, Arasli H, Ozturen A, Lodhi RN, Ongsakul V (2022) Antecedents of human-robot collaboration: theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model. J Hosp Tour Technol 13(2):240–263 Google Scholar
Esterwood C, Essenmacher K, Yang H, Zeng F, Robert LP (2022) A personable robot: meta-analysis of robot personality and human acceptance. IEEE Robot Autom Lett 7(3):6918–6925 Google Scholar
Liao S, Lin L, Chen Q (2023) Research on the acceptance of collaborative robots for the industry 5.0 era-the mediating effect of perceived competence and the moderating effect of robot use self-efficacy. Int J Ind Ergonom 95:103455 Google Scholar
Schauffel N, Gründling J, Ewerz B, Weyers B, Ellwart T (2022) Human-robot teams. spotlight on psychological acceptance factors exemplified within the BUGWRIGHT2 project. PsychArchives
Dammers H, Vervier LS, Mittelviefhaus L, Brauner PM, Ziefle MC, Gries T (2022) Usability of human-robot interaction within textile production: insights into the acceptance of different collaboration types. Universitätsbibliothek der RWTH Aachen, online
Xu N, Wang K-J (2021) Adopting robot lawyer? The extending artificial intelligence robot lawyer technology acceptance model for legal industry by an exploratory study. J Manag Organ 27(5):867–885 Google Scholar
Kim D, Kim S (2021) A model for user acceptance of robot journalism: influence of positive disconfirmation and uncertainty avoidance. Technol Forecast Soc Change 163:120448 Google Scholar
Van Wynsberghe A (2013) Designing robots for care: care centered value-sensitive design. Sci Eng Ethics 19:407–433 Google Scholar
Kyrarini M, Lygerakis F, Rajavenkatanarayanan A, Sevastopoulos C, Nambiappan HR, Chaitanya KK, Babu AR, Mathew J, Makedon F (2021) A survey of robots in healthcare. Technologies 9(1):8 Google Scholar
Fischinger D, Einramhof P, Papoutsakis K, Wohlkinger W, Mayer P, Panek P, Hofmann S, Koertner T, Weiss A, Argyros A et al (2016) Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: first prototype and lessons learned. Robot Auton Syst 75:60–78 Google Scholar
Coeckelbergh M (2010) Health care, capabilities, and AI assistive technologies. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 13:181–190 Google Scholar
Stahl BC, Coeckelbergh M (2016) Ethics of healthcare robotics: towards responsible research and innovation. Robot Auton Syst 86:152–161 Google Scholar
Beedholm K, Frederiksen K, Frederiksen A-MS, Lomborg K (2015) Attitudes to a robot bathtub in D anish elder care: a hermeneutic interview study. Nurs Health Sci 17(3):280–286 Google Scholar
Carnevale A (2016) Will robots know us better than we know ourselves? Robot Auton Syst 86:144–151 Google Scholar
Sharkey A, Sharkey N (2012) Granny and the robots: ethical issues in robot care for the elderly. Ethics Inf Technol 14:27–40 Google Scholar
Turja T, Taipale S, Kaakinen M, Oksanen A (2020) Care workers’ readiness for robotization: identifying psychological and socio-demographic determinants. Int J Soc Robot 12(1):79–90 Google Scholar
Sjöberg J, Brooks E (2022) Understanding school children’s playful experiences through the use of educational robotics-the impact of open-ended designs. In: International conference on human-computer interaction, pp 456–468. Springer
Amanatiadis A, Kaburlasos VG, Dardani C, Chatzichristofis SA, Mitropoulos A (2020) Social robots in special education: creating dynamic interactions for optimal experience. IEEE Consum Electron Mag 9(3):39–45 Google Scholar
Erol O, Sevim-Cirak N, Baser Gülsoy VG (2023) The effects of educational robotics activities on students’ attitudes towards STEM and ICT courses. Int J Technol Educ 6(2):203–223 Google Scholar
Macko V, Felber P, Bergram K, Holzer A (2023) Using educational robotics to support active learning experiences and foster computational thinking skills among non-stem university students. In: 2023 IEEE international conference on teaching, assessment and learning for engineering (TALE), pp 1–8. IEEE
Bindsbergen KL, Hoek H, Gorp M, Ligthart ME, Hindriks KV, Neerincx MA, Alderliesten T, Bosman PA, Merks JH, Grootenhuis MA et al (2022) Interactive education on sleep hygiene with a social robot at a pediatric oncology outpatient clinic: feasibility, experiences, and preliminary effectiveness. Cancers 14(15):3792 Google Scholar
Scaradozzi D, Cesaretti L, Screpanti L, Mangina E (2021) Identification and assessment of educational experiences: utilizing data mining with robotics. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 28(4):103–113 Google Scholar
Ponticorvo M, Rubinacci F, Dell’Aquila E, Marocco D (2022) Coding and educational robotics with peers: the c0d1nc experience to foster inclusion. Front Robot AI 9:825536 Google Scholar
Schina D, Esteve-González V, Usart M, Lázaro-Cantabrana J-L, Gisbert M (2020) The integration of sustainable development goals in educational robotics: a teacher education experience. Sustainability 12(23):10085 Google Scholar
Piedade J, Dorotea N, Pedro A, Matos JF (2020) On teaching programming fundamentals and computational thinking with educational robotics: a didactic experience with pre-service teachers. Educ Sci 10(9):214 Google Scholar
Castro E, Cecchi F, Salvini P, Valente M, Buselli E, Menichetti L, Calvani A, Dario P (2018) Design and impact of a teacher training course, and attitude change concerning educational robotics. Int J Soc Robot 10:669–685 Google Scholar
Papadakis S, Vaiopoulou J, Sifaki E, Stamovlasis D, Kalogiannakis M (2021) Attitudes towards the use of educational robotics: exploring pre-service and in-service early childhood teacher profiles. Educ Sci 11(5):204 Google Scholar
Bowen J, Morosan C (2018) Beware hospitality industry: the robots are coming. Worldw Hosp Tour Themes 10(6):726–733 Google Scholar
Vercelli A, Rainero I, Ciferri L, Boido M, Pirri F (2018) Robots in elderly care. DigitCult-Sci J Digital Cult 2(2):37–50 Google Scholar
Gursoy D, Chi OH, Lu L, Nunkoo R (2019) Consumers acceptance of artificially intelligent (AI) device use in service delivery. Int J Inf Manag 49:157–169 Google Scholar
Huang M-H, Rust RT (2018) Artificial intelligence in service. J Serv Res 21(2):155–172 Google Scholar
Bill M, Muller C, Kraus W, Bieller S (2022) World robotics 2022. Technical report, IFR International Federation of Robotics
Steil JJ, Maier GW (2020) Kollaborative roboter: universale werkzeuge in der digitalisierten und vernetzten arbeitswelt. Handbuch Gestaltung digitaler und vernetzter Arbeitswelten 323–346
Schou C, Madsen O (2017) A plug and produce framework for industrial collaborative robots. Int J Adv Robot Syst 14(4)
Romero D, Stahre J, Wuest T, Noran O, Bernus P, FastBerglund Å, Gorecky D (2016) Towards an operator 4.0 typology: a human-centric perspective on the fourth industrial revolution technologies. In: Proceedings of the international conference on computers and industrial engineering (CIE46), Tianjin, China, pp 29–31
Kopp T, Schafer A, Kinkel S (2020) Kollaborierende oder kollaborationsfahige roboter. Welche rolle spielt die mensch-roboter-kollaboration in der praxis 19–23
Grahn S, Gopinath V, Wang XV, Johansen K (2018) Exploring a model for production system design to utilize large robots in human-robot collaborative assembly cells. Procedia Manuf 25:612–619 Google Scholar
Ranz F, Komenda T, Reisinger G, Hold P, Hummel V, Sihn W (2018) A morphology of human robot collaboration systems for industrial assembly. Procedia CiRp 72:99–104 Google Scholar
Dieber B, Schlotzhauer A, Brandstotter M (2017) Safety and security-success factors of sensitive robotic technologies. e & i Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik 134:299–303 Google Scholar
You S, Kim J-H, Lee S, Kamat V, Robert LP Jr (2018) Enhancing perceived safety in human-robot collaborative construction using immersive virtual environments. Autom Constr 96:161–170 Google Scholar
Charalambous G, Fletcher S, Webb P (2013) Human-automation collaboration in manufacturing: identifying key implementation factors. In: Proceedings of the international conference on ergonomics & human factors, p 59
Richert A, Müller S, Schröder S, Jeschke S (2018) Anthropomorphism in social robotics: empirical results on human-robot interaction in hybrid production workplaces. AI Soc 33:413–424 Google Scholar
Granulo A, Fuchs C, Puntoni S (2019) Psychological reactions to human versus robotic job replacement. Nat Hum Behav 3(10):1062–1069 Google Scholar
Turja T, Aaltonen I, Taipale S, Oksanen A (2020) Robot acceptance model for care (ram-care): a principled approach to the intention to use care robots. Inf Manag 57(5):103220 Google Scholar
Ke C, Lou VW-q, Tan KC-k, Wai MY, Chan LL (2020) Changes in technology acceptance among older people with dementia: the role of social robot engagement. Int J Med Inf 141:104241 Google Scholar
Lotz V, Himmel S, Ziefle M (2019) You’re my mate–acceptance factors for human-robot collaboration in industry. In: International conference on competitive manufacturing (COMA 19), vol 31, pp 405–411
Beno M (2019) Robot rights in the era of robolution and the acceptance of robots from the Slovak citizen’s perspective. In: 2019 IEEE international symposium on robotic and sensors environments (ROSE), pp 1–7. IEEE
Turja T, Van Aerschot L, Särkikoski T, Oksanen A (2018) Finnish healthcare professionals’ attitudes towards robots: reflections on a population sample. Nurs Open 5(3):300–309 Google Scholar
Cormons L, Poulet C, Pellier D, Pesty S, Fiorino H (2020) Testing social robot acceptance: what if you could be assessed for dementia by a robot? A pilot study. In: 2020 6th international conference on mechatronics and robotics engineering (ICMRE), pp 92–98. IEEE
Robben D, Fukuda E, De Haas M (2023) The effect of gender on perceived anthropomorphism and intentional acceptance of a storytelling robot. In: Companion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pp 495–499
Winterstein K, Keller L, Huffstadt K, Müller NH (2021) Acceptance of social and telepresence robot assistance in German households. In: International conference on human-computer interaction, pp 326–339. Springer
Babel F, Kraus J, Miller L, Kraus M, Wagner N, Minker W, Baumann M (2021) Small talk with a robot? The impact of dialog content, talk initiative, and gaze behavior of a social robot on trust, acceptance, and proximity. Int J Soc Robot 1–14
Martinez JE, VanLeeuwen D, Stringam BB, Fraune MR (2023) Hey? ! What did you think about that robot? Groups polarize users’ acceptance and trust of food delivery robots. In: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pp 417–427
Babel F, Kraus J, Miller L, Kraus M, Wagner N, Minker W, Baumann M (2021) Small talk with a robot? The impact of dialog content, talk initiative, and gaze behavior of a social robot on trust, acceptance, and proximity. Int J Soc Robot 1–14
Babel F, Hock P, Kraus J, Baumann M (2022) It will not take long! longitudinal effects of robot conflict resolution strategies on compliance, acceptance and trust. In: 2022 17th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI), pp 225–235. IEEE
Wagner-Hartl V, Schmid R, Gleichauf K (2022) The influence of task complexity on acceptance and trust in human-robot interaction-gender and age differences. Cogn Comput Internet Things 43:118–126 Google Scholar
Goodrich MA, Schultz AC et al (2008) Human–robot interaction: a survey. Found Trends® Hum–Comput Interact 1(3):203–275
Chatzopoulos A, Kalogiannakis M, Papadakis S, Papoutsidakis M (2022) A novel, modular robot for educational robotics developed using action research evaluated on technology acceptance model. Educ Sci 12(4):274 Google Scholar
Zhang Y, Luo R, Zhu Y, Yin Y (2021) Educational robots improve k-12 students’ computational thinking and stem attitudes: systematic review. J Educ Comput Resarch 59(7):1450–1481 Google Scholar
Madion MP, Kastenmeier A, Goldblatt MI, Higgins RM (2022) Robotic surgery training curricula: prevalence, perceptions, and educational experiences in general surgery residency programs. Surg Endosc 1–9
Alhmiedat T, Alotaibi M (2023) Employing social robots for managing diabetes among children: SARA. Wirel Pers Commun 130(1):449–468 Google Scholar
Alhmiedat T, Alotaibi M (2022) Design and evaluation of a personal robot playing a self-management for children with obesity. Electronics 11(23):4000 Google Scholar
Robinson NL, Connolly J, Hides L, Kavanagh DJ (2020) A social robot to deliver an 8-week intervention for diabetes management: initial test of feasibility in a hospital clinic. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 628–639. Springer
Esterwood C, Essenmacher K, Yang H, Zeng F, Robert LP (2021) A meta-analysis of human personality and robot acceptance in human-robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1–18
Höpfl F, Peisl T, Greiner C (2023) Exploring stakeholder perspectives: enhancing robot acceptance for sustainable healthcare solutions. Sustain Technol Entrep 2:100045 Google Scholar
Turja T, Oksanen A (2019) Robot acceptance at work: a multilevel analysis based on 27 EU countries. Int J Soc Robot 11(4):679–689 Google Scholar
Dudek M, Baisch S, Knopf M, Kolling T (2021) “This isn’t me!’’: the role of age-related self-and user images for robot acceptance by elders. Int J Soc Robot 13:1173–1187 Google Scholar
N Alia FW, Monizaihasra M, Farizah S (2022) Does Covid-19 drive robot acceptance? An exploratory study of service robot in hospitality. Tour Hosp Manag 28(1):193–209 Google Scholar
Bishop L, Maris A, Dogramadzi S, Zook N (2019) Social robots: the influence of human and robot characteristics on acceptance. Paladyn, J Behav Robot 10(1):346–358 Google Scholar
Song CS, Kim Y-K (2022) The role of the human-robot interaction in consumers’ acceptance of humanoid retail service robots. J Bus Res 146:489–503 Google Scholar
Meissner A, Trübswetter A, Conti-Kufner AS, Schmidtler J (2020) Friend or foe? understanding assembly workers’ acceptance of human-robot collaboration. ACM Trans Hum-Robot Interact (THRI) 10(1):1–30 Google Scholar
Rossi S, Conti D, Garramone F, Santangelo G, Staffa M, Varrasi S, Di Nuovo A (2020) The role of personality factors and empathy in the acceptance and performance of a social robot for psychometric evaluations. Robotics 9(2):39 Google Scholar
Huang D, Jin X, Huang J, Kong S (2023) Tourist acceptance of robot chefs in gastronomy experiences: a behavioural reasoning perspective. Tour Manag Perspect 48:101172 Google Scholar
Chatterjee S, Chaudhuri R, Vrontis D (2023) Acceptance of social robot and its challenges: from privacy calculus perspectives. Technol Forecast Soc Change 196:122862 Google Scholar
Niemelä M, Heikkilä P, Lammi H, Oksman V (2019) A social robot in a shopping mall: studies on acceptance and stakeholder expectations. Soc Robot Technol, Soc Ethical Aspects Hum-Robot Interact 119–144
Kory-Westlund JM, Breazeal C (2019) Assessing children’s perceptions and acceptance of a social robot. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM international conference on interaction design and children, pp 38–50
Dhaussy T, Jabaian B, Lefèvre F (2023) Interaction acceptance modelling and estimation for a proactive engagement in the context of human-robot interactions. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pp 3069–3074
Takanokura M, Kurashima R, Ohhira T, Kawahara Y, Ogiya M (2021) Implementation and user acceptance of social service robot for an elderly care program in a daycare facility. J Ambient Intell Hum Comput
Schreibelmayr S, Mara M (2022) Robot voices in daily life: vocal human-likeness and application context as determinants of user acceptance. Front Psychol 13:787499 Google Scholar
Bui D, Ghim Y-G (2023) Industrial design guidelines for robot acceptance: the role of morphological elements of mobile service robots in a restaurant environment
Kharchenko A, Lippl J, Hostettler R. Embracing acceptance: hugging robodies improves robot acceptance by the general population
Dembovski A, Amitai Y, Levy-Tzedek S (2022) A socially assistive robot for stroke patients: acceptance, needs, and concerns of patients and informal caregivers. Front Rehabilit Sci 2:793233 Google Scholar
Anthony CA, Rojas EO, Keffala V, Glass NA, Shah AS, Miller BJ, Hogue M, Willey MC, Karam M, Marsh JL (2020) Acceptance and commitment therapy delivered via a mobile phone messaging robot to decrease postoperative opioid use in patients with orthopedic trauma: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 22(7):17750 Google Scholar
Park Y-H, Chang HK, Lee MH, Lee SH (2019) Community-dwelling older adults’ needs and acceptance regarding the use of robot technology to assist with daily living performance. BMC Geriatr 19:1–9 Google Scholar
Liu B, Markopoulos P, Tetteroo D (2019) How anthropomorphism affects user acceptance of a robot trainer in physical rehabilitation. In: HEALTHINF, pp 30–40
Mascret N, Vors O, Temprado J-J (2023) Mobile telepresence robot as a new service to remotely supervise older adults’ physical activity: effectiveness, acceptance, and perception. Int J Soc Robot 15(7):1243–1260 Google Scholar
Chen Y, Luo Y, Ozkan Yerebakan M, Hu B (2022) Human acceptance of the cleaning robot in grocery environments during the covid-19 pandemic. In: Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, vol 66, pp 177–181. SAGE Publications Sage, Los Angeles
Tan CKK, Lou VW, Cheng CYM, He PC, Mor YY (2023) Technology acceptance of a social robot (LOVOT) among single older adults in Hong Kong and Singapore: protocol for a multimethod study. JMIR Res Protoc 12(1):48618 Google Scholar
Mishra N, Baka E, Magnenat Thalmann N (2021) Exploring potential and acceptance of socially intelligent robot. In: Intelligent scene modeling and human-computer interaction, pp 259–282. Springer, online
Esfandbod A, Nourbala A, Rokhi Z, Meghdari AF, Taheri A, Alemi M (2022) Design, manufacture, and acceptance evaluation of apo: a lip-syncing social robot developed for lip-reading training programs. Int J Soc Robot 1–15
Misso D, Zhen E, Kelly J, Collopy D, Clark G (2021) A progressive scholarly acceptance analysis of robot-assisted arthroplasty: a review of the literature and prediction of future research trends. J Robot Surg 15(5):813–819 Google Scholar
Gambino A, Kim J, Sundar SS (2019) Digital doctors and robot receptionists: user attributes that predict acceptance of automation in healthcare facilities. In: Extended abstracts of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pp 1–6
Langholf L, Battefeld D, Henning K, Zatrib R, Groß A, Richter B, Vollmer A-L, Schneider S (2021) Testing the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion on the acceptance of health regulations in a video human-robot interaction study. In: Companion of the 2021 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction, pp 121–125
Jessup S, Willis SM, Alarcon G (2023) Extending the affective technology acceptance model to human-robot interactions: a multi-method perspective
Hurmuz MZ, Jansen-Kosterink SM, Flierman I, Signore S, Zia G, Signore S, Fard B (2023) Are social robots the solution for shortages in rehabilitation care? Assessing the acceptance of nurses and patients of a social robot. Comput Hum Behav Artif Hum 1(2):100017 Google Scholar
Schmidbauer C, Umele M, Zigart T, Weiss A, Schlund S (2020) On the intention to use the pepper robot as communication channel in a business context: results of a user acceptance survey. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on human-agent interaction, pp 204–211
Bayles MA, Lee J, Kadylak T, Rogers WA (2023) Understanding older adults’ initial perceptions of robot appearance and function: implications for acceptance. Gerontechnology 22(2):1–7 Google Scholar
Chatzopoulos A, Kalovrektis K, Xenakis A, Papoutsidakis M, Kalogiannakis M, Psycharis S (2022) An advanced physical computing-based educational robot platform evaluated by technology acceptance model. In: 2022 10th international conference on information and education technology (ICIET), pp 6–10. IEEE
Listanto V, Ramadhan A, Firmansyah N, Susanti BH (2023) Learners acceptance of u-KIT EDU as an educational application for robot building, coding, and controlling. J Educ 7(2):279–288 Google Scholar
Kawata M, Maeda M, Yoshikawa Y, Kumazaki H, Kamide H, Baba J, Matsuura N, Ishiguro H (2022) Preliminary investigation of the acceptance of a teleoperated interactive robot participating in a classroom by 5th grade students. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 194–203. Springer
Liu Y, Liao S (2021) The influence of robot autonomy on perception distance, acceptance and subjective norm. In: Journal of physics: conference series, vol 2037, p 012116. IOP Publishing
Puig-Pey A, Zamora JL, Amante B, Moreno J, Garrell A, Grau A, Bolea Y, Santamaria A, Sanfeliu A (2023) Human acceptance in the human-robot interaction scenario for last-mile goods delivery. In: 2023 IEEE international conference on advanced robotics and its social impacts (ARSO), pp 33–39. IEEE
Wu S (2022) Design of question answering interactive open platform for power grid business acceptance robot. Mob Inf Syst 2022:9472873 Google Scholar
Stoevesandt D, Jahn P, Watzke S, Wohlgemuth WA, Behr D, Buhtz C, Faber I, Enger S, Schwarz K, Brill R (2021) Comparison of acceptance and knowledge transfer in patient information before an mri exam administered by humanoid robot versus a tablet computer: a randomized controlled study. In: RoFo-Fortschritte Auf dem Gebiet der Rotgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren, vol 193, pp 947–954. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rudigerstrasse 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
Shin S, Kang D, Kwak SS (2022) Telepresence robot for isolated patients in the covid-19 pandemic: effects of socio-relationship and telecommunication device types on patients’ acceptance of robots. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 263–276. Springer
Khodabandelou R, Alhoqani K (2023) The effects of Wedo 2.0 robot workshop on Omani grade 5 students’ acquisition of the computational thinking concepts and acceptance of the robot technology. Educ 3-13 51(6):1027–1043 Google Scholar
Oliver J, Oliván R, Shukla J, Folch A, Martínez-Leal R, Castellá M, Puig D (2019) Stakeholders acceptance and expectations of robot-assisted therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder. In: 2019 28th IEEE international conference on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 1–7. IEEE
Vázquez EP, Lledó GL, Carreres AL, Lledó AL, Cerdá AG. Analysis of the initial acceptance of the bee-bot robot in students with autism spectrum disorder
Ghazy K, Fedorova AE (2022) Hotel employees’ attitude and acceptance toward human-robot co-working based on the industry 5.0 concept. Chang Soc Personal 6(4):906–926 Google Scholar
Acar Y, Taylor JR, Stanton C (2021) Expressions of robot confidence and their effect on trust and acceptance of recommendations. In: Proceedings of the 2021 Australasian conference on robotics and automation (ACRA 2021), 6th December–8th December, 2021, Online
Hoogerwerf E, Bharatheesha M, Clever D (2020) Ioc based trajectory generation to increase human acceptance of robot motions in collaborative tasks. IFAC-PapersOnLine 53(2):9790–9795 Google Scholar
Whelan S, Murphy K, Barrett E, Krusche C, Santorelli A, Casey D (2018) Factors affecting the acceptability of social robots by older adults including people with dementia or cognitive impairment: a literature review. Int J Soc Robot 10(5):643–668 Google Scholar
Chen Z, Zhao B, Zhao S, Hu Y, Zhang J (2018) Learning and planning based on merged experience from multiple situations for a service robot. Appl Sci 8(10):1832 Google Scholar
Cavallo F, Esposito R, Limosani R, Manzi A, Bevilacqua R, Felici E, Di Nuovo A, Cangelosi A, Lattanzio F, Dario P et al (2018) Robotic services acceptance in smart environments with older adults: user satisfaction and acceptability study. J Med Internet Res 20(9):9460 Google Scholar
Michaelis JE, Mutlu B (2018) Reading socially: transforming the in-home reading experience with a learning-companion robot. Sci Robot 3(21):5999 Google Scholar
Rantanen T, Lehto P, Vuorinen P, Coco K (2018) Attitudes towards care robots among finnish home care personnel-a comparison of two approaches. Scand J Car Sci 32(2):772–782 Google Scholar
Rantanen T, Lehto P, Vuorinen P, Coco K (2018) The adoption of care robots in home care–a survey on the attitudes of finnish home care personnel. J Clin Nurs 27(9–10):1846–1859 Google Scholar
Bernotat J, Eyssel F (2018) Can (‘t) wait to have a robot at home?-Japanese and German users’ attitudes toward service robots in smart homes. In: 2018 27th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 15–22. IEEE
Ferretti M, Morgavi G, Veruggio G (2018) The acceptability of caregiver robots in elderly people. In: ICT4AWE, pp 111–118
Rossi S, Santangelo G, Staffa M, Varrasi S, Conti D, Di Nuovo A (2018) Psychometric evaluation supported by a social robot: Personality factors and technology acceptance. In: 2018 27th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 802–807. IEEE
Quintero NM, Ahtinen A (2023) University language instructors programming robotic learning applications: design and implementation of encouraging programming workshop experiences. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on human-agent interaction, pp 171–179
Nazir TA, Lebrun B, Li B (2023) Improving the acceptability of social robots: make them look different from humans. Plos One 18(11):0287507 Google Scholar
Dosso JA, Kailley JN, Martin SE, Robillard JM (2023) “A safe space for sharing feelings’’: perspectives of children with lived experiences of anxiety on social robots. Multimodal Technol Interact 7(12):118 Google Scholar
Yamato N, Sumioka H, Ishiguro H, Shiomi M, Kohda Y (2023) Technology acceptance models from different viewpoints of caregiver, receiver, and care facility administrator: lessons from long-term implementation using baby-like interactive robot for nursing home residents with dementia. J Technol Hum Serv 41(4):296–321 Google Scholar
Roy SK, Singh G, Sadeque S, Gruner RL (2024) Customer experience quality with social robots: does trust matter? Technol Forecast Soc Change 198:123032 Google Scholar
Williams AJ, Townsend E, Naeche N, Chapman-Nisar A, Hollis C, Slovak P, Minds DYWS (2023) Investigating the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriation of a socially assistive robot among minority youth at risk of self-harm: results of 2 mixed methods pilot studies. JMIR Form Res 7:52336 Google Scholar
Williams AJ, Freed M, Theofanopoulou N, Daudén Roquet C, Klasnja P, Gross J, Schleider J, Slovak P (2023) Feasibility, perceived impact, and acceptability of a socially assistive robot to support emotion regulation with highly anxious university students: mixed methods open trial. JMIR Mental Health 10:46826 Google Scholar
Wada M, Wong J, Tsevis E, Mann J, Hanaoka H, Hung L (2023) Staff’s attitudes towards the use of mobile telepresence robots in long-term care homes in Canada. Can J Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement 1–21
Tobis S, Piasek-Skupna J, Neumann-Podczaska A, Religioni U, Suwalska A (2023) Determinants of attitude to a humanoid social robot in care for older adults: a post-interaction study. Med Sci Monit Int Med J Exp Clin Res 29:941205-1
Cameron D, Collins EC, Saille S, Eimontaite I, Greenwood A, Law J (2023) The social triad model: considering the deployer in a novel approach to trust in human–robot interaction. Int J Soc Robot 1–14
Apraiz A, Mulet Alberola JA, Lasa G, Mazmela M, Nguyen HN (2023) Development of a new set of heuristics for the evaluation of human-robot interaction in industrial settings: heuristics robots experience (heurobox). Front Robot AI 10:1227082 Google Scholar
Roesler E (2023) Anthropomorphic framing and failure comprehensibility influence different facets of trust towards industrial robots. Front Robot AI 10:1235017 Google Scholar
Mlakar I, Smrke U, Flis V, Kobilica N, Horvat S, Ilijevec B, Musil B, Plohl N (2024) Using structural equation modeling to explore patients’ and healthcare professionals’ expectations and attitudes towards socially assistive humanoid robots in nursing and care routine. Int J Soc Robot 16(1):105–124 Google Scholar
Harris-Gersten ML, Davagnino JM, Alcorn ER, Hastings SN (2023) Usability and acceptability of social robot pets among community-dwelling veterans living with dementia and their caregivers. Am J Alzheimer’s Disease Other Dement® 38:15333175231200973
Song Y, Luximon A, Luximon Y (2023) Facial anthropomorphic trustworthiness scale for social robots: a hybrid approach. Biomimetics 8(4):335 Google Scholar
Kraus M, Wagner N, Untereiner N, Minker W (2022) Including social expectations for trustworthy proactive human-robot dialogue. In: Proceedings of the 30th ACM conference on user modeling, adaptation and personalization, pp 23–33
Joo K, Kim HM, Hwang J (2023) A study on the experience economy examining a robot service in the restaurant industry based on demographic characteristics. Sustainability 15(14):10827 Google Scholar
Zhong M, Fraile M, Castellano G, Winkle K (2023) A case study in designing trustworthy interactions: implications for socially assistive robotics. Front Comput Sci 5:1152532 Google Scholar
Chatzoglou PD, Lazaraki V, Apostolidis SD, Gasteratos AC (2023) Factors affecting acceptance of social robots among prospective users. Int J Soc Robot 1–20
Wassenaer N, Tolboom J, Beekum O (2023) The effect of robotics education on gender differences in stem attitudes among dutch 7th and 8th grade students. Educ Sci 13(2):139 Google Scholar
Baby D, John L, Pia JC, Sreedevi P, Pattnaik SJ, Varkey A, Gupta S (2023) Role of robotics and artificial intelligence in oral health education. Knowledge, perception and attitude of dentists in India. J Educ Health Promot 12(1):384 Google Scholar
Alsoliman BSH (2022) Virtual robotics in education: the experience of eighth grade students in stem. In: Frontiers in education, vol 7, p 950766. Frontiers Media SA
Lei M, Clemente IM, Liu H, Bell J (2022) The acceptance of telepresence robots in higher education. Int J Soc Robot 14(4):1025–1042 Google Scholar
Smakman MH, Konijn EA, Vogt P, Pankowska P (2021) Attitudes towards social robots in education: enthusiast, practical, troubled, sceptic, and mindfully positive. Robotics 10(1):24 Google Scholar
Masril M, Ambiyar A, Jalinus N, Ridwan R, Hendrik B (2021) Robotic education in 21st century: teacher acceptance of lego mindstorms as powerful educational tools. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl 12(2):119–126 Google Scholar
Kerimbayev N, Beisov N, Kovtun A, Nurym N, Akramova A (2020) Robotics in the international educational space: integration and the experience. Educ Inf Technol 25:5835–5851 Google Scholar
Grimaldi R, Denicolai L, Brignone S, Palmieri S et al (2021) Robotic vision and embodiment. a social and educative hypothesis of experience with robots. Ann Rev Cyberther Telemed 18:36–40 Google Scholar
Turner S, Mormando J, Park B, Huang J (2020) Attitudes of robotic surgery educators and learners: challenges, advantages, tips and tricks of teaching and learning robotic surgery. J Robot Surg 14:455–461 Google Scholar
Díaz-Lauzurica B, Moreno-Salinas D (2019) Computational thinking and robotics: a teaching experience in compulsory secondary education with students with high degree of apathy and demotivation. Sustainability 11(18):5109 Google Scholar
Kaji Y, Kawata J, Fujisawa S (2019) Educational effect of participation in robot competition on experience-based learning. J Robot Mechatron 31(3):383–390 Google Scholar
Silva AFF, Avila Ferreira ME, Inácio FAJ, Faria Andrade J (2019) An experience in distance robotics education through an extension course. In: 2019 Latin American robotics symposium (LARS), 2019 Brazilian symposium on robotics (SBR) and 2019 workshop on robotics in education (WRE), pp 404–406. IEEE
Lee SA, Liang Y (2019) A communication model of human–robot trust development for inclusive education. Artif Intell Incl Educ Specul Futures Emerg Pract 101–115
González YAC, Muñoz-Repiso AG-V (2018) A robotics-based approach to foster programming skills and computational thinking: pilot experience in the classroom of early childhood education. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on technological ecosystems for enhancing multiculturality, pp 41–45