International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology - IRJIET International Open Access, Monthly, Peer Reviewed, Reputed Journal ISSN (online): 2581-3048

Impact Factor (2025): 6.9

DOI Prefix: 10.47001/IRJIET

The Role of Trust in Human-Robot Interaction: A Perspective on Factors Influencing Trust Development

Dapo Adeniyi, PhDHCPC Practitioner (UK), Principal Consultant, and Director of Counseling, Phenopatmos Global Consulting, Nigeria

Vol 9 No 6 (2025): Volume 9, Issue 6, June 2025 | Pages: 112-118

International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology

OPEN ACCESS | Research Article | Published Date: 17-06-2025

doi Logo doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2025.906013

pdf iconFull Text PDF
Abstract

Trust is a fundamental determinant of successful human-robot interaction (HRI), shaping user acceptance, reliance, and collaboration with robotic systems. This paper examines trust development in HRI through the lens of Social Exchange Theory (SET), emphasizing key influencing factors such as reliability, transparency, predictability, and social behavior. Trust plays a pivotal role in various domains, including healthcare, manufacturing, and autonomous systems, where user confidence in robotic performance is crucial for effective adoption. By analyzing empirical research, this study highlights strategies to foster trust and mitigate challenges associated with human-robot collaboration. Recommendations for designing transparent, consistent, and socially intelligent robotic systems are provided to enhance trust and usability in different sectors.

Keywords

Trust, Human-Robot Interaction, Social Exchange Theory, Reliability, Transparency, Autonomy


Citation of this Article

Adeniyi, A.O. (2025). The Role of Trust in Human-Robot Interaction: A Perspective on Factors Influencing Trust Development. International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology - IRJIET, 9(6), 112-118. Article DOI https://doi.org/10.47001/IRJIET/2025.906013

Licence Copyright (c) 2026 International Research Journal of Innovations in Engineering and Technology creative common licence This work is licensed under Creative common Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 Internation Licence
References
  1. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York, NY: Wiley.
  2. Broadbent, E., Stafford, R., & MacDonald, B. (2013). Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: Review and future directions. International Journal of Social Robotics, 5(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0196-4
  3. de Visser, E. J., Peeters, M. M. M., Jung, M. F., Kohn, S., Shaw, T. H., Pak, R., & Krueger, F. (2020). Towards a theory of longitudinal trust calibration in human–robot teams. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(2), 459–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00618-6
  4. Desai, M., Stubbs, K., Steinfeld, A., & Yanco, H. A. (2012). Creating trustworthy robots: Lessons and inspirations from automated systems. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 409–416.
  5. Eyssel, F., & Hegel, F. (2012). (S)he’s got the look: Gender stereotyping of robots. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(9), 2213–2230.
  6. Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00372-X
  7. Groom, V., & Nass, C. (2007). Can robots be teammates? Benchmarks in human–robot teams. Interaction Studies, 8(3), 483–500. https://doi.org/10.1075/is.8.3.10gro
  8. Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2021). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 63(5), 857–875. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819900813
  9. Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y. C., 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
  10. Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597–606.
  11. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392
  12. Madhavan, P., & Wiegmann, D. A. (2007). Similarities and differences between human–human and human–automation trust: An integrative review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8(4), 277–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220500337708
  13. Madhavan, P., & Wiegmann, D. A. (2021). Automation trust and reliance in human-automation interaction. Human Factors, 63(3), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819900813
  14. Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors, 52(3), 381–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810376055
  15. People Will Lie to Robots to Avoid 'Hurting Their Feelings'. (2016, August 23). Wired UK. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com
  16. Robinette, P., Li, W., Allen, R., Howard, A., & Wagner, A. R. (2016). Overtrust of robots in emergency evacuation scenarios. Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 101–108.
  17. Robinette, P., Wagner, A. R., & Howard, A. M. (2020). The effect of robot performance on human trust in time-critical situations. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 9(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3345505
  18. Salem, M., Lakatos, G., Amirabdollahian, F., & Dautenhahn, K. (2015). Would you trust a (faulty) robot? Effects of error, task type and personality on human-robot cooperation and trust. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 141–148.
  19. ScienceDirect. (2024). The dynamics of human–robot trust attitude and behavior — Exploring the effects of anthropomorphism and type of failure. Computers in Human Behavior, 150,
  20. Sheridan, T. B. (2016). Human–robot interaction: Status and challenges. Human Factors, 58(4), 525–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816644364
  21. van Pinxteren, M. M. E., Wetzels, R. W. H., Ruyter, K., & Pluymaekers, M. (2019). Trust in humanoid robots: Implications for services marketing. Journal of Services Marketing, 33(4), 507–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-01-2018-0045
  22. Wang, N., Pynadath, D. V., & Hill, S. G. (2016). Trust calibration within a human-robot team: Comparing automatically generated explanations. Proceedings of the 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 109–116.
  23. Waytz, A., Heafner, J., & Epley, N. (2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 113–117.
  24. Wortham, R. H., Theodorou, A., & Bryson, J. J. (2017). Robot transparency: Improving understanding of intelligent behaviour for designers and users. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 8(1), 140–157. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2017-0010
  25. Xu, W., & Yanco, H. A. (2022). Trust in robots: A survey of factors influencing human trust in autonomous systems and robots. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(4), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3518824
  26. You, S., & Robert, L. P. (2018). Trusting robots in teams: Examining the impacts of autonomy and transparency. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 8(4), 1–24. 

Copyright @ 2026 IRJIET. All Right Reserved.

Licensed underCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.