Trust Perception Scale-HRI
Construct Summary
The author did not provide a definition of trust in this paper.
Rating = 31%
| Check? | Guideline Item |
|---|---|
| ✖ | Is the construct defined? |
| ✖ | Does the final version of the items capture the construct as it has been defined by the authors? |
| ✓ | Is the item generation process discussed (e.g., literature review, Delphi method, crowd-sourcing)? |
| ✖ | Person to items 10:1 for the initial set of items? |
| ✖ | Did they perform an EFA, PCA, Rasch, or similar test to determine the item to factor relationship? |
| ✖ | Did they describe how they determined number of factors? |
| ✖ | Did they report the full initial set of items? |
| ✖ | Did they provide loadings (EFA) or item fits (Rasch) of all items? |
| ✓ | Is there a description of the item removal process (e.g., using infit/outfit, factor loading minimum value, or cross-loading values)? |
| ✓ | Did they list the final items included in the scale? |
| ✖ | Did they include a factor structure test (e.g., second EFA, CFA, DIF, test for unidimensionality when using Rasch, or similar)? |
| ✖ | Was a measure of reliability (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, McDonalds Omega_h or Omega_t, Tarkkonen’s Rho) reported? |
| ✓ | Was a test of validity (e.g., predictive, concurrent, convergent, discriminant) reported? |
Comments Short version of the scale is reported to by 14 items but only 11 are identified in the text of the paper.
Reviewed by Experts ✓
Downloads
PAPER
Schaefer, K. 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). Boston, MA: Springer US.
PDF of scale as well as instructions for administration and scoring are included in the main text of the paper (see link above). Check the paper for more details.
Final Scale Items (40 or 14*):
Items with a * represent short version of the scale (author reports 14 total but only 11 identified in paper)
What % of the time will this robot be…
Considered part of the team
Responsible
Supportive
Incompetent
Dependable*
Friendly
Reliable*
Pleasant
Unresponsive*
Autonomous
Predictable*
Conscious
Lifelike
A good teammate
Led astray by unexpected changes in the environment
What % of the time will this robot…
Act consistently*
Protect people
Act as part of the team
Function successfully
Malfunction
Clearly communicate
Require frequent maintenance
Openly communicate
Have errors
Perform a task better than a novice human user
Know the difference between friend and foe
Provide feedback*
Possess adequate decision-making capability
Warn people of potential risks in the environment
Meet the needs of the mission/task*
Provide appropriate information*
Communicate with people*
Work best with a team
Keep classified information secure
Perform exactly as instructed*
Make sensible decisions
Work in close proximity with people
Tell the truth
Perform many functions at one time
Follow directions*