Cheating with robots: how at ease do they make us feel? People are not perfect, and if given the chance, some will be dishonest with no regrets. Some people will cheat just a little to gain some advantage, and others will not do it at all. With the prospect of more humanrobot interactions in the future, it will become very important to understand which kind of roles a robot can have in the regulation of cheating behavior. We investigated whether people will cheat while in the presence of a robot and to what extent this depends on the role the robot plays. We ran a study to test cheating behavior with a die task, and allocated people to one of the following conditions: 1) participants were alone in the room while doing the task; 2) with a robot with a vigilant role or 3) with a robot that had a supporting role in the task, accompanying and giving instructions. Our results showed that participants cheated significantly more than chance when they were alone or with the robot giving instructions. In contrast, cheating could not be proven when the robot presented a vigilant role. This study has implications for humanrobot interaction and for the deployment of autonomous robots in sensitive roles in which people may be prone to dishonest behavior.

Human Trust After Robot Mistakes: Study of the Effects of Different Forms of Robot Communication Collaborative robots that work alongside humans will experience service breakdowns and make mistakes. These robotic failures can cause a degradation of trust between the robot and the community being served. A loss of trust may impact whether a user continues to rely on the robot for assistance. In order to improve the teaming capabilities between humans and robots, forms of communication that aid in developing and maintaining trust need to be investigated. In our study, we identify four forms of communication which dictate the timing of information given and type of initiation used by a robot. We investigate the effect that these forms of communication have on trust with and without robot mistakes during a cooperative task. Participants played a memory task game with the help of a humanoid robot that was designed to make mistakes after a certain amount of time passed. The results showed that participantsxe2x80x99 trust in the robot was better preserved when that robot offered advice only upon request as opposed to when the robot took initiative to give advice.