Lie, Repent, Repeat: Exploring Apologies after Repeated Robot Deception
Authors
This work presents an empirical study of repeated robot deception and its effects on changes in behavior and trust in a human-robot interaction scenario. 715 online and 50 in-person participants completed a multitrial driving simulation in which the car's robot assistant repeatedly lies and apologies. Through a mixed-method approach, our results show that apologies that offer justifications for deception in our scenario mitigate the negative effects on trust over multiple trials. However, given the time-sensitive, high-risk nature of our scenario, none of the apologies caused people to significantly change their decision to exceed the speed limit while rushing their dying friend to the hospital. These results add much needed knowledge to the understudied area of robot deception and could inform designers and policymakers of future practices when considering deploying robots that may learn to deceive.
Research Questions / Practical Problems
Question signals indexed for this paper.
- 60%
Would you do it? Enacting Moral Dilemmas in Virtual Reality for Understanding Ethical Decision-Making
CHI '20· Immersion & Presence Research +1
- 60%
Towards Fairness in Practice: A Practitioner-Oriented Rubric for Evaluating Fair ML Toolkits
CHI '21· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
Jury Learning: Integrating Dissenting Voices into Machine Learning Models
CHI '22· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
Capable but Amoral? Comparing AI and Human Expert Collaboration in Ethical Decision Making
CHI '22· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
Out of Context: Investigating the Bias and Fairness Concerns of "Artificial Intelligence as a Service"
CHI '23· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
"That's important, but...": How Computer Science Researchers Anticipate Unintended Consequences of Their Research Innovations
CHI '23· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
“It is currently hodgepodge”: Examining AI/ML Practitioners’ Challenges during Co-production of Responsible AI Values
CHI '23· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
STILE: Exploring and Debugging Social Biases in Pre-trained Text Representations
CHI '24· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
"Why do we do this?": Moral Stress and the Affective Experience of Ethics in Practice
CHI '25· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
- 60%
"The Conduit by which Change Happens": Processes, Barriers, and Support for Interpersonal Learning about Responsible AI
CHI '25· AI Ethics, Fairness & Accountability +1
Based on Jaccard similarity of research subtopics & professions (≥60%)