A Literature Review on Safety Perception and Trust during Human–Robot Interaction with Autonomous Mobile Robots That Apply to Industrial Environments

References

• Alves, C., Cardoso, A., Colim, A., Bicho, E., Braga, A. C., Cunha, J., Faria, C., & Rocha, L. A. (2022). Human–robot interaction in industrial settings: Perception of multiple participants at a crossroad intersection scenario with different courtesy cues. Robotics, 11(3), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics11030059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American National Standards Institute/Robotic Industries Association. (2020). American National Standard for industrial mobile robots - Safety requirements part 1: Requirements for the industrial mobile robot (ANSI/RIA R15.08-1-2020).
   Google Scholar
• Angerer, S., Strassmair, C., Staehr, M., Roettenbacher, M., & Robertson, N. M. (2012). Give me a hand—The potential of mobile assistive robots in automotive logistics and assembly applications. In H. Greiner (Eds.), IEEE International Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA) (pp. 111–116). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/TePRA.2012.6215663
   Google Scholar
• Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batista, M. R., Macharet, D. G., & Romero, R. A. F. (2020). Socially acceptable navigation of people with multi-robot teams. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 98(2), 481–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-01080-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berx, N., Pintelon, L., & Decré, W. (2021). Psychosocial impact of collaborating with an autonomous mobile robot: Results of an exploratory case study. In C. Bethel & A. Paiva (Eds.), ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 280–282). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434074.3447176
   Google Scholar
• Bethel, C. L., Salomon, K., Murphy, R. R., & Burke, J. L. (2007). Survey of psychophysiology measurements applied to human-robot interaction. In RO-MAN 2007 - The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 732–737). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2007.4415182
   Google Scholar
• Bonarini, A. (2020). Communication in human-robot interaction. Current Robotics Reports, 1(4), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-020-00026-1
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brandl, C., Mertens, A., & Schlick, C. M. (2016). Human-robot interaction in assisted personal services: Factors influencing distances that humans will accept between themselves and an approaching service robot. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 26(6), 713–727. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20675
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breazeal, C. (2003). Toward sociable robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3-4), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-8890(02)00373-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brock, D., McClimens, B., Wasylyshyn, C., Trafton, J. G., & McCurry, M. (2010). Evaluating the utility of auditory perspective-taking in robot speech presentations. In S. Ystad, M. Aramaki, R. Kronland-Martinet, & K. Jensen (Eds.), Auditory Display. CMMR ICAD 2009 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol 5954, pp. 266–286). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12439-6_14
   Google Scholar
• Bunz, E., Chadalavada, R. T., Andreasson, H., Krug, R., Schindler, M., & Lilienthal, A. (2016, August 31). Spatial augmented reality and eye tracking for evaluating human robot interaction [Workshop]. RO-MAN 2016 Workshop: Workshop on Communicating Intentions in Human-Robot Interaction, New York, NY, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Chadalavada, R. T., Andreasson, H., Krug, R., & Lilienthal, A. J. (2015). That’s on my mind! robot to human intention communication through on-board projection on shared floor space. In T. Duckett & A. Tapus (Eds.), 2015 European Conference on Mobile Robots (ECMR) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECMR.2015.7403771
   Google Scholar
• Chadalavada, R. T., Andreasson, H., Schindler, M., Palm, R., & Lilienthal, A. J. (2020). Bi-directional navigation intent communication using spatial augmented reality and eye-tracking glasses for improved safety in human–robot interaction. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 61, 101830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcim.2019.101830
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chanseau, A., Dautenhahn, K., Koay, K. L., & Salem, M. (2016). Who is in charge? Sense of control and robot anxiety in human-robot interaction. In S.Y. Okita, B. Mutlu, & T. Shibata (Eds.), 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2016 (pp. 743–748). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745202
   Google Scholar
• Che, Y., Culbertson, H., Tang, C. W., Aich, S., & Okamura, A. M. (2018). Facilitating human-mobile robot communication via haptic feedback and gesture teleoperation. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 7(3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3243503
   Google Scholar
• Che, Y., Okamura, A. M., & Sadigh, D. (2020). Efficient and trustworthy social navigation via explicit and implicit robot–human communication. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 36(3), 692–707. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2020.2964824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Che, Y., Sun, C. T., & Okamura, A. M. (2018). Avoiding human-robot collisions using haptic communication. In A. Zelinsky (Eds.), IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 5828–5834). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2018.8460946
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y., Yang, C., Gu, Y., & Hu, B. (2022). Influence of mobile robots on human safety perception and system productivity in wholesale and retail trade environments: A pilot study. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 52(4), 624–635. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2021.3134553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Z., Jiang, C., & Guo, Y. (2018). Pedestrian-robot interaction experiments in an exit corridor. In P. Oh & F. Park (Eds.), 15th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots (pp. 29–34). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/URAI.2018.8441839
   Google Scholar
• Chinthaka, P., Premachandra, C., & Amarakeerthi, S. (2018). Effective natural communication between human hand and mobile robot using Raspberry-pi. IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Chiou, M., Hawes, N., Stolkin, R., Shapiro, K. L., Kerlin, J. R., & Clouter, A. (2016). Towards the principled study of variable autonomy in mobile robots. IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Coovert, M. D., Lee, T., Shindev, I., & Sun, Y. (2014). Spatial augmented reality as a method for a mobile robot to communicate intended movement. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosgun, A., Florencio, D. A., & Christensen, H. I. (2013). Autonomous person following for telepresence robots. In R. Dillmann & R. Siegwart (Eds.), IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 4335–4342). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6631191
   Google Scholar
• Dautenhahn, K., Walters, M., Woods, S., Koay, K. L., Nehaniv, C. L., Sisbot, E. A., Alami, R., & Siméon, T. (2006). How may I serve you? A robot companion approaching a seated person in a helping context. In M. A. Goodrich, A. C. Schultz, & D.J. Bruemmer (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2006 ACM Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 172–179). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1121241.1121272
   Google Scholar
• Fauadi, M. H. F. M., Akmal, S., Ali, M. M., Anuar, N. I., Ramlan, S., Noor, A. Z. M., & Awang, N. (2018). Intelligent vision-based navigation system for mobile robot: A technological review. Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences (PEN), 6(2), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.21533/pen.v6i2.174
   Google Scholar
• Fernandez, R., John, N., Kirmani, S., Hart, J., Sinapov, J., & Stone, P. (2018). Passive demonstrations of light-based robot signals for improved human interpretability. In 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (pp. 234–239). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525728
   Google Scholar
• Fiore, S. M., Wiltshire, T. J., Lobato, E. J. C., Jentsch, F. G., Huang, W. H., & Axelrod, B. (2013). Toward understanding social cues and signals in human-robot interaction: Effects of robot gaze and proxemic behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(NOV), 859. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00859
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fischer, K., Jensen, L. C., Suvei, S., & Bodenhagen, L. (2016). Between legibility and contact: The role of gaze in robot approach. In S.Y. Okita, B. Mutlu, & T. Shibata (Eds.), 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (pp. 646–651). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745186
   Google Scholar
• Green, S. A., Richardson, S. M., Stiles, R. J., Billinghurst, M., & Chase, J. G. (2008). Multimodal metric study for human-robot collaboration. In P. Dini (Eds.), 1st International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interaction (pp. 218–223). Advances in Computer-Human Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACHI.2008.8
   Google Scholar
• Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Anchor Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y., De Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 53(5), 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811417254
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, J., Mirsky, R., Xiao, X., Tejeda, S., Mahajan, B., Goo, J., Baldauf, K., Owen, S., & Stone, P. (2020). Using human-inspired signals to disambiguate navigational intentions. In A.R. Wagner, D. Feil-Seifer, K.S. Haring, S. Rossi, T. Williams, H. He, & S. Sam Ge (Eds.), ICSR 2020: Social robotics (pp. 320–331). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62056-1_27
   Google Scholar
• Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In P. A. Hancock & N. Meshkati (Eds.), Advances in psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 139–183). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
   Google Scholar
• Hoggenmueller, M., Chen, J., & Hespanhol, L. (2020). Emotional expressions of non-humanoid urban robots: The role of contextual aspects on interpretations. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Hopko, S., Wang, J., & Mehta, R. (2022). Human factors considerations and metrics in shared space human-robot collaboration: A systematic review. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 9, 799522. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.799522
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettenrauch, H., Eklundh, K. S., Green, A., & Topp, E. A. (2006). Investigating spatial relationships in human-robot interaction. In W. Hamel, Y. Liu, B. Siciliano, & S. Sugano (Eds.), IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 5052–5059). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2006.282535
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. (2021). ISO 8373:2021 robotics—Vocabulary. ISO/TC 299.
   Google Scholar
• Jevtić, A., Doisy, G., Parmet, Y., & Edan, Y. (2015). Comparison of interaction modalities for mobile indoor robot guidance: Direct physical interaction, person following, and pointing control. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 45(6), 653–663. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2015.2461683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johannsen, G. (2001). Auditory displays in human–machine interfaces of mobile robots for non-speech communication with humans. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 32(2), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013953213049
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johannsen, G. (2004). Auditory displays in human-machine interfaces. Proceedings of the IEEE, 92(4), 742–758. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2004.825905
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joosse, M., Lohse, M., Berkel, N. V., Sardar, A., & Evers, V. (2021). Making appearances: How robots should approach people. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 10(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3385121
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jost, J., Kirks, T., Chapman, S., & Rinkenauer, G. (2021). Keep distance with a smile - User characteristics in human-robot collaboration. In M. Behnam & L.L. Bello (Eds.), IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, ETFA (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ETFA45728.2021.9613601
   Google Scholar
• Kaiser, F. G., Glatte, K., & Lauckner, M. (2019). How to make nonhumanoid mobile robots more likable: Employing kinesic courtesy cues to promote appreciation. Applied Ergonomics, 78(July 2019), 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.02.004
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koay, K. L., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S. N., & Walters, M. L. (2006). Empirical results from using a comfort level device in human-robot interaction studies. In M. A. Goodrich, A. C. Schultz, & D.J. Bruemmer (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 194–201). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1121241.1121276
   Google Scholar
• Koay, K. L., Sisbot, E. A., Syrdal, D. S., Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., & Alami, R. (2007). Exploratory study of a robot approaching a person in the context of handing over an object. In AAAI Spring Symposium: Multidisciplinary Collaboration for Socially Assistive Robotics (pp. 18–24). AAAI.
   Google Scholar
• Kosinski, T., Obaid, M., Wozniak, P. W., Fjeld, M., & Kucharski, J. (2016). A fuzzy data-based model for human-robot proxemics. In S.Y. Okita, B. Mutlu, & T. Shibata (Eds.), 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2016 (pp. 335–340). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2016.7745152
   Google Scholar
• Kruse, T., Pandey, A. K., Alami, R., & Kirsch, A. (2013). Human-aware robot navigation: A survey. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 61(12), 1726–1743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2013.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lasota, P. A., Fong, T., & Shah, J. A. (2017). A survey of methods for safe human-robot interaction. Foundations and Trends in Robotics, 5(3), 261–349. https://doi.org/10.1561/2300000052
   Google Scholar
• Lauckner, M., Kobiela, F., & Manzey, D. (2014). ‘Hey robot, please step back!’ - Exploration of a spatial threshold of comfort for human-mechanoid spatial interaction in a hallway scenario. In F. Amirabdollahian, R. Aylett, & P. A. Vargas (Eds.), The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 780–787). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2014.6926348
   Google Scholar
• Laugwitz, B., Held, T., & Schrepp, M. (2008). Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire. In A. Holzinger (Eds.), Symposium of the Workgroup Human-Computer Interaction and Usability Engineering of the Austrian Computer Society (pp. 63–76). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89350-9_6
   Google Scholar
• Leichtmann, B., & Nitsch, V. (2020). How much distance do humans keep toward robots? Literature review, meta-analysis, and theoretical considerations on personal space in human-robot interaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68(April 2020), 101386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101386
   Google Scholar
• Liang, C.-J., & Cheng, M. H. (2023). Trends in robotics research in occupational safety and health: A scientometric analysis and review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(10), 5904. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20105904
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lichtenthäler, C., Peters, A., Griffiths, S., & Kirsch, A. (2013). Social navigation - Identifying robot navigation patterns in a path crossing scenario. In G. Herrmann, M.J. Pearson, A. Lenz, P. Bremner, A. Spiers, & U. Leonards (Eds.), International Conference on Social Robotics 2013: Social Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 84–93). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02675-6_9
   Google Scholar
• Lo, S. Y., Yamane, K., & Sugiyama, K. I. (2019). Perception of pedestrian avoidance strategies of a self-balancing mobile robot. In D. Sun & F. Arai (Eds.), 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (pp. 1243–1250). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS40897.2019.8968191
   Google Scholar
• MacArthur, K. R., Stowers, K., & Hancock, P. A. (2017). Human-robot interaction: Proximity and speed—Slowly back away from the robot!. In P. Savage-Knepshield & J. Chen (Eds.), Advances in human factors in robots and unmanned systems (pp. 365–374). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41959-6_30
   Google Scholar
• Markis, A., Papa, M., Kaselautzke, D., Rathmair, M., Sattinger, V., & Brandstötter, M. (2019). Safety of mobile robot systems in industrial applications. In A. Pichler, P. M. Roth, R. Sablatnig, G. Stübl, & M. Vincze (Eds.), Proceedings of the ARW & OAGM Workshop (pp. 26–31). Verlag der Technischen Universität Graz. https://doi.org/10.3217/978-3-85125-663-5-04
   Google Scholar
• Matsumaru, T. (2006). Mobile robot with preliminary-announcement and display function of forthcoming motion using projection equipment. In K. Dautenhahn & C. L. Nehaniv (Eds.), ROMAN 2006 - The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 443–450). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314368
   Google Scholar
• Mavrogiannis, C., Hutchinson, A. M., MacDonald, J., Alves-Oliveira, P., & Knepper, R. A. (2019). Effects of distinct robot navigation strategies on human behavior in a crowded environment. In J. Kim, A. Tapus, D. Sirkin, M. Jung, & S.S. Kwak (Eds.), 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 421–430). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673115
   Google Scholar
• May , A. D., Dondrup, C., & Hanheide, M. (2015). Show me your moves! Conveying navigation intention of a mobile robot to humans. In T. Duckett & A. Tapus (Eds.), 2015 European Conference on Mobile Robots (ECMR) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECMR.2015.7324049
   Google Scholar
• Mead, R., & Matarić, M. J. (2015). Robots have needs too: People adapt their proxemic preferences to improve autonomous robot recognition of human social signals. AISB Convention.
   Google Scholar
• Mead, R., & Matarić, M. J. (2016). Robots have needs too: How and why people adapt their proxemic behavior to improve robot social signal understanding. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 5(2), 48–68. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.5.2.Mead
   Google Scholar
• Mumm, J., & Mutlu, B. (2011). Human-robot proxemics: Physical and psychological distancing in human-robot interaction. In A. Billard, P. Kahn, J. Adams, & J.G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 331–338). ACM/IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957786
   Google Scholar
• Neggers, M. M. E., Cuijpers, R. H., & Ruijten, P. A. M. (2018). Comfortable passing distances for robots. In S.S. Ge, J.-J. Cabibihan, M.A. Salichs, E. Broadbent, H. He, A.R. Wagner, & A. Castro-González (Eds.), International conference on social robotics 2018: Social robotics. Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 431–440). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_42
   Google Scholar
• Neggers, M. M. E., Cuijpers, R. H., Ruijten, P. A. M., & Ijsselsteijn, W. A. (2022). Determining shape and size of personal space of a human when passed by a robot. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14(2), 561–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00805-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nomura, S., Inoue, T., Takahashi, Y., & Nakamura, T. (2014). Learning control based on intention recognition by inverted two-wheeled mobile robot through interactive operation. In Joint 7th International Conference on Soft Computing and Intelligent Systems, SCIS 2014 and 15th International Symposium on Advanced Intelligent Systems (pp. 117–122). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCIS-ISIS.2014.7044740
   Google Scholar
• Pacchierotti, E., Christensen, H. I., & Jensfelt, P. (2006). Evaluation of passing distance for social robots. In K. Dautenhahn & C. L. Nehaniv (Eds.), ROMAN 2006 - The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 315–320). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314436
   Google Scholar
• Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88, 105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandey, A., Pandey, S., & Parhi, D. (2017). Mobile robot navigation and obstacle avoidance techniques: A review. International Robotics & Automation Journal, 2(3), 96–105. https://doi.org/10.15406/iratj.2017.02.00023
   Google Scholar
• Pourmehr, S., Thomas, J., & Vaughan, R. (2016). What untrained people do when asked "make the robot come to you. In C. Bartneck, Y. Nagai, A. Paiva, & S. Šabanović (Eds.), 11th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 495–496). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451823
   Google Scholar
• Rossi, S., Staffa, M., Bove, L., Capasso, R., & Ercolano, G. (2017). User’s personality and activity influence on HRI comfortable distances. In A. Kheddar, E. Yoshida, S.S. Ge, K. Suzuki, J.-J. Cabibihan, F. Eyssel, & H. He (Eds.), International Conference on Social Robotics 2017: Social Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 167–177). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_17
   Google Scholar
• Rubagotti, M., Tusseyeva, I., Baltabayeva, S., Summers, D., & Sandygulova, A. (2022). Perceived safety in physical human–robot interaction—A survey. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 151(May 2022), 104047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2022.104047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, T. L., MacArthur, K., Volante, W., Hancock, G., MacGillivray, T., Shugars, W., & Hancock, P. A. (2017). Trust and prior experience in human-robot interaction. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 61(1), 1809–1813. (https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601934
   Google Scholar
• Schneier, M., Schneier, M., & Bostelman, R. (2015). Literature review of mobile robots for manufacturing. NIST interagency/internal report (NISTIR). National Institute of Standards and Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Sheridan, T. B. (2016). Human–robot interaction: Status and challenges. Human Factors, 58(4), 525–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816644364
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiomi, M., Zanlungo, F., Hayashi, K., & Kanda, T. (2014). Towards a socially acceptable collision avoidance for a mobile robot navigating among pedestrians using a pedestrian model. International Journal of Social Robotics, 6(3), 443–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0238-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shomin, M., Vaidya, B., Hollis, R., & Forlizzi, J. (2015). Human-approaching trajectories for a person-sized balancing robot. In K. Yamane & J. Forlizzi (Eds.), Proceedings of IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts, ARSO (pp. 20–25). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARSO.2014.7020974
   Google Scholar
• Shrestha, M. C., Kobayashi, A., Onishi, T., Uno, E., Yanagawa, H., Yokoyama, Y., Kamezaki, M., Schmitz, A., & Sugano, S. (2016). Intent communication in navigation through the use of light and screen indicators. In C. Bartneck, Y. Nagai, A. Paiva, & S. Šabanović (Eds.), 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 523–524). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451837
   Google Scholar
• Shrestha, M. C., Onishi, T., Kobayashi, A., Kamezaki, M., & Sugano, S. (2018). Communicating directional intent in robot navigation using projection indicators. In R. Chellali, W. Chen, F. Mastrogiovani, A. Kumar Pandey, H. Wang, & T. Inamura (Eds.), 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (pp. 746–751). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525528
   Google Scholar
• Siino, R. M., Chung, J., & Hinds, P. J. (2008). Colleague vs. tool: Effects of disclosure in human-robot collaboration. In M. Buss & K. Kühnlenz (Eds.), RO-MAN 2008 - The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 558–562). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2008.4600725
   Google Scholar
• Suvei, S. D., Vroon, J., Somoza Sanchéz, V. V., Bodenhagen, L., Englebienne, G., Krüger, N., & Evers, V. (2018). “I would like to get close to you”: Making robot personal space invasion less intrusive with a social gaze cue. In M. Antona & C. Stephanidis (Eds.), UAHCI 2018: Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Virtual, Augmented, and Intelligent Environments. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 366–385). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92052-8_29
   Google Scholar
• Syrdal, D. S., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S., Walters, M. L., & Koay, K. L. (2006). Doing the right thing wrong’ - Personality and tolerance to uncomfortable robot approaches. In K. Dautenhahn & C. L. Nehaniv (Eds.), ROMAN 2006 - The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 183–188). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2006.314415
   Google Scholar
• Takayama, L., & Pantofaru, C. (2009). Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction. In 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 5495–5502). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2009.5354145
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J., & Vaughan, R. (2019). Right of way, assertiveness and social recognition in human-robot doorway interaction. In D. Sun & F. Arai (Eds.), 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (pp. 333–339). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS40897.2019.8967862
   Google Scholar
• Tzafestas, S. G. (2018). Mobile robot control and navigation: A global overview. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 91(1), 35–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-018-0805-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unger, H., Markert, T., & Müller, E. (2018). Evaluation of use cases of autonomous mobile robots in factory environments. Procedia Manufacturing, 17, 254–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.044
   Google Scholar
• Unhelkar, V. V., Siu, H. C., & Shah, J. A. (2014). Comparative performance of human and mobile robotic assistants in collaborative fetch-and-deliver tasks. In G. Sagerer, M. Imai, T. Belpaeme, & A. Thomaz (Eds.), ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI ) (pp. 82–89). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1145/2559636.2559655
   Google Scholar
• Vasic, M., & Billard, A. (2013). Safety issues in human-robot interactions. In R. Dillmann & R. Siegwart (Eds.), IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 197–204). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2013.6630576
   Google Scholar
• Vassallo, C., Olivier, A.-H., Souères, P., Crétual, A., Stasse, O., & Pettré, J. (2017). How do walkers avoid a mobile robot crossing their way? Gait & Posture, 51, 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.09.022
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vassallo, C., Olivier, A.-H., Souères, P., Crétual, A., Stasse, O., & Pettré, J. (2018). How do walkers behave when crossing the way of a mobile robot that replicates human interaction rules? Gait & Posture, 60, 188–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.12.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villani, V., Sabattini, L., Riggio, G., Levratti, A., Secchi, C., & Fantuzzi, C. (2017). Interacting with a mobile robot with a natural infrastructure-less interface. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 50(1), 12753–12758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2017.08.1829
   Google Scholar
• Villani, V., Sabattini, L., Secchi, C., & Fantuzzi, C. (2018). A framework for affect-based natural human-robot interaction. In 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2018 (pp. 1038–1044). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525658
   Google Scholar
• Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., Te Boekhorst, R., Koay, K. L., Kaouri, C., Woods, S., Nehaniv, C., Lee, D., & Werry, I. (2005). The influence of subjects’ personality traits on personal spatial zones in a human-robot interaction experiment. In K. Kawamura & A.C. Schultz (Eds.), ROMAN 2005 - IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 347–352). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2005.1513803
   Google Scholar
• Walters, M. L., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S. N., & Koay, K. L. (2007). Robotic etiquette: Results from user studies involving a fetch and carry task. In A. Schultz, C. Breazeal, T. Fong, & S. Kiesler (Eds.), 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp. 317–324). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1145/1228716.1228759
   Google Scholar
• Walters, M. L., Syrdal, D. S., Koay, K. L., Dautenhahn, K., & Boekhorst, R. T (2008). Human approach distances to a mechanical-looking robot with different robot voice styles. In M. Buss & K. Kühnlenz (Eds.), RO-MAN 2008 - The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 707–712). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2008.4600750
   Google Scholar
• Warta, S. F., Newton, O. B., Song, J., Best, A., & Fiore, S. M. (2018). Effects of social cues on social signals in human-robot interaction during a hallway navigation task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 62(1), 1128–1132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931218621258
   Google Scholar
• Wiltshire, T. J., Lobato, E. J. C., Garcia, D. R., Fiore, S. M., Jentsch, F. G., Huang, W. H., & Axelrod, B. (2015). Effects of robotic social cues on interpersonal attributions and assessments of robot interaction behaviors. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59(1), 801–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931215591245
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, B., Amirian, J., Eberle, H., Pettré, J., Holloway, C., & Carlson, T. (2022). From HRI to CRI: Crowd robot interaction—Understanding the effect of robots on crowd motion: Empirical study of pedestrian dynamics with a wheelchair and a pepper robot. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14(3), 631–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00812-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar