Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred

Although the capabilities of service robots are increasing, avoiding any mistakes is difficult. Therefore, strategies for mitigating mistakes, such as apology behavior designs, are essential for service robots. Past studies reported that costly apology is perceived as more sincere than non-costly on...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2023-02, Vol.18 (2), p.e0281604
Hauptverfasser: Okada, Yuka, Kimoto, Mitsuhiko, Iio, Takamasa, Shimohara, Katsunori, Shiomi, Masahiro
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2
container_start_page e0281604
container_title PloS one
container_volume 18
creator Okada, Yuka
Kimoto, Mitsuhiko
Iio, Takamasa
Shimohara, Katsunori
Shiomi, Masahiro
description Although the capabilities of service robots are increasing, avoiding any mistakes is difficult. Therefore, strategies for mitigating mistakes, such as apology behavior designs, are essential for service robots. Past studies reported that costly apology is perceived as more sincere than non-costly ones and more acceptable. To increase the apology cost in robot service situations, we thought that using multiple robots would increase the perceived costs in the of financial, physical, and time costs. Therefore, we focused on the number of robots who apologize for their mistakes as well as their individual, specific roles and behaviors during such apologies. We investigated the differences in perceived impressions toward apologies from two robots (the main robot that makes a mistake and apologizes and a sub-robot that also apologizes) and an apology from just one robot (only the main robot) through a web survey with 168 valid participants. The experiment results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated apologies from two robots more than one robot in the context of forgiveness, negative word-of-mouth, trust, and intention to use. We also conducted another web survey with 430 valid participants to investigate the effects of different roles for the sub-robot: apologize-only, cleaning-up-only, and both actions. The experimental results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated both actions in the context of forgiveness and reliable/competent perspectives.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0281604
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_2778914058</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A738197363</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_0fb101c350c54c76ac5e6a7cf6428cf8</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A738197363</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-f9013d84aec416fec574947a58942e5a87236be73a9aee3089a110ae0cd362a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkluLEzEUxwdR3HX1G4gOCKIPrblNLj4oZfFSWFjQ1ddwmp5pp0wnNcl4-fam29mlI_sgeUg4-Z3_yTn5F8VTSqaUK_pm4_vQQTvd-Q6nhGkqibhXnFLD2UQywu8fnU-KRzFuCKm4lvJhccKlpowacVq8v_rlyyaWC0wJQ5nW0JVZ8G052_nWrxqMZR38tkwZC37hUywhYLkLWGMIuHxcPKihjfhk2M-Kbx8_XJ1_nlxcfpqfzy4mTlU6TWpDKF9qAegElTW6SgkjFFTaCIYVaMW4XKDiYACRE22AUgJI3JJLBoqfFc8PurvWRzv0Hi1TShsqSKUzMT8QSw8buwvNFsIf66Gx1wEfVhZCalyLltQLSqjjFXGVcEqCq1CCcrUUTLt6r_VuqNYvtrh02KUA7Uh0fNM1a7vyP60xQjImssCrQSD4Hz3GZLdNdNi20KHvr99teEWZNBl98Q96d3cDtYLcQNPVPtd1e1E7U1xTo7jkmZreQeW1xG3j8r_WTY6PEl6PEjKT8HdaQR-jnX_98v_s5fcx-_KIXSO0aR1926fGd3EMigPogo8xu-p2yJTYvc9vpmH3PreDz3Pas-MPuk26MTb_C-4t9mM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2778914058</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Okada, Yuka ; Kimoto, Mitsuhiko ; Iio, Takamasa ; Shimohara, Katsunori ; Shiomi, Masahiro</creator><contributor>Han, The Anh</contributor><creatorcontrib>Okada, Yuka ; Kimoto, Mitsuhiko ; Iio, Takamasa ; Shimohara, Katsunori ; Shiomi, Masahiro ; Han, The Anh</creatorcontrib><description>Although the capabilities of service robots are increasing, avoiding any mistakes is difficult. Therefore, strategies for mitigating mistakes, such as apology behavior designs, are essential for service robots. Past studies reported that costly apology is perceived as more sincere than non-costly ones and more acceptable. To increase the apology cost in robot service situations, we thought that using multiple robots would increase the perceived costs in the of financial, physical, and time costs. Therefore, we focused on the number of robots who apologize for their mistakes as well as their individual, specific roles and behaviors during such apologies. We investigated the differences in perceived impressions toward apologies from two robots (the main robot that makes a mistake and apologizes and a sub-robot that also apologizes) and an apology from just one robot (only the main robot) through a web survey with 168 valid participants. The experiment results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated apologies from two robots more than one robot in the context of forgiveness, negative word-of-mouth, trust, and intention to use. We also conducted another web survey with 430 valid participants to investigate the effects of different roles for the sub-robot: apologize-only, cleaning-up-only, and both actions. The experimental results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated both actions in the context of forgiveness and reliable/competent perspectives.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281604</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36812194</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Apologies ; Attitude ; Behavior ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Collaboration ; Context ; Design ; Engineering and Technology ; Errors ; Experiments ; Failure ; Forecasts and trends ; Forgiveness ; Humans ; Hypotheses ; Innovations ; Multiple robots ; Pandemics ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Researchers ; Robotics ; Robotics industry ; Robots ; Service robots ; Social Behavior ; Social Sciences ; Surveys ; Trust</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2023-02, Vol.18 (2), p.e0281604</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2023 Okada et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2023 Okada et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2023 Okada et al 2023 Okada et al</rights><rights>2023 Okada et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-f9013d84aec416fec574947a58942e5a87236be73a9aee3089a110ae0cd362a73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-f9013d84aec416fec574947a58942e5a87236be73a9aee3089a110ae0cd362a73</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4338-801X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9946224/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9946224/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,724,777,781,861,882,2096,2915,23847,27905,27906,53772,53774,79349,79350</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36812194$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Han, The Anh</contributor><creatorcontrib>Okada, Yuka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimoto, Mitsuhiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iio, Takamasa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shimohara, Katsunori</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shiomi, Masahiro</creatorcontrib><title>Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>Although the capabilities of service robots are increasing, avoiding any mistakes is difficult. Therefore, strategies for mitigating mistakes, such as apology behavior designs, are essential for service robots. Past studies reported that costly apology is perceived as more sincere than non-costly ones and more acceptable. To increase the apology cost in robot service situations, we thought that using multiple robots would increase the perceived costs in the of financial, physical, and time costs. Therefore, we focused on the number of robots who apologize for their mistakes as well as their individual, specific roles and behaviors during such apologies. We investigated the differences in perceived impressions toward apologies from two robots (the main robot that makes a mistake and apologizes and a sub-robot that also apologizes) and an apology from just one robot (only the main robot) through a web survey with 168 valid participants. The experiment results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated apologies from two robots more than one robot in the context of forgiveness, negative word-of-mouth, trust, and intention to use. We also conducted another web survey with 430 valid participants to investigate the effects of different roles for the sub-robot: apologize-only, cleaning-up-only, and both actions. The experimental results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated both actions in the context of forgiveness and reliable/competent perspectives.</description><subject>Apologies</subject><subject>Attitude</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Context</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Errors</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Failure</subject><subject>Forecasts and trends</subject><subject>Forgiveness</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Multiple robots</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>Robotics industry</subject><subject>Robots</subject><subject>Service robots</subject><subject>Social Behavior</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Trust</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkluLEzEUxwdR3HX1G4gOCKIPrblNLj4oZfFSWFjQ1ddwmp5pp0wnNcl4-fam29mlI_sgeUg4-Z3_yTn5F8VTSqaUK_pm4_vQQTvd-Q6nhGkqibhXnFLD2UQywu8fnU-KRzFuCKm4lvJhccKlpowacVq8v_rlyyaWC0wJQ5nW0JVZ8G052_nWrxqMZR38tkwZC37hUywhYLkLWGMIuHxcPKihjfhk2M-Kbx8_XJ1_nlxcfpqfzy4mTlU6TWpDKF9qAegElTW6SgkjFFTaCIYVaMW4XKDiYACRE22AUgJI3JJLBoqfFc8PurvWRzv0Hi1TShsqSKUzMT8QSw8buwvNFsIf66Gx1wEfVhZCalyLltQLSqjjFXGVcEqCq1CCcrUUTLt6r_VuqNYvtrh02KUA7Uh0fNM1a7vyP60xQjImssCrQSD4Hz3GZLdNdNi20KHvr99teEWZNBl98Q96d3cDtYLcQNPVPtd1e1E7U1xTo7jkmZreQeW1xG3j8r_WTY6PEl6PEjKT8HdaQR-jnX_98v_s5fcx-_KIXSO0aR1926fGd3EMigPogo8xu-p2yJTYvc9vpmH3PreDz3Pas-MPuk26MTb_C-4t9mM</recordid><startdate>20230222</startdate><enddate>20230222</enddate><creator>Okada, Yuka</creator><creator>Kimoto, Mitsuhiko</creator><creator>Iio, Takamasa</creator><creator>Shimohara, Katsunori</creator><creator>Shiomi, Masahiro</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4338-801X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230222</creationdate><title>Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred</title><author>Okada, Yuka ; Kimoto, Mitsuhiko ; Iio, Takamasa ; Shimohara, Katsunori ; Shiomi, Masahiro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c758t-f9013d84aec416fec574947a58942e5a87236be73a9aee3089a110ae0cd362a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Apologies</topic><topic>Attitude</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Context</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Errors</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Failure</topic><topic>Forecasts and trends</topic><topic>Forgiveness</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Multiple robots</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>Robotics industry</topic><topic>Robots</topic><topic>Service robots</topic><topic>Social Behavior</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Trust</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Okada, Yuka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimoto, Mitsuhiko</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Iio, Takamasa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shimohara, Katsunori</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shiomi, Masahiro</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological &amp; Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Okada, Yuka</au><au>Kimoto, Mitsuhiko</au><au>Iio, Takamasa</au><au>Shimohara, Katsunori</au><au>Shiomi, Masahiro</au><au>Han, The Anh</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2023-02-22</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>e0281604</spage><pages>e0281604-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Although the capabilities of service robots are increasing, avoiding any mistakes is difficult. Therefore, strategies for mitigating mistakes, such as apology behavior designs, are essential for service robots. Past studies reported that costly apology is perceived as more sincere than non-costly ones and more acceptable. To increase the apology cost in robot service situations, we thought that using multiple robots would increase the perceived costs in the of financial, physical, and time costs. Therefore, we focused on the number of robots who apologize for their mistakes as well as their individual, specific roles and behaviors during such apologies. We investigated the differences in perceived impressions toward apologies from two robots (the main robot that makes a mistake and apologizes and a sub-robot that also apologizes) and an apology from just one robot (only the main robot) through a web survey with 168 valid participants. The experiment results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated apologies from two robots more than one robot in the context of forgiveness, negative word-of-mouth, trust, and intention to use. We also conducted another web survey with 430 valid participants to investigate the effects of different roles for the sub-robot: apologize-only, cleaning-up-only, and both actions. The experimental results showed that the participants significantly preferred and positively evaluated both actions in the context of forgiveness and reliable/competent perspectives.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>36812194</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0281604</doi><tpages>e0281604</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4338-801X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2023-02, Vol.18 (2), p.e0281604
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_plos_journals_2778914058
source MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Apologies
Attitude
Behavior
Biology and Life Sciences
Collaboration
Context
Design
Engineering and Technology
Errors
Experiments
Failure
Forecasts and trends
Forgiveness
Humans
Hypotheses
Innovations
Multiple robots
Pandemics
Research and Analysis Methods
Researchers
Robotics
Robotics industry
Robots
Service robots
Social Behavior
Social Sciences
Surveys
Trust
title Two is better than one: Apologies from two robots are preferred
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T11%3A44%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20is%20better%20than%20one:%20Apologies%20from%20two%20robots%20are%20preferred&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Okada,%20Yuka&rft.date=2023-02-22&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=e0281604&rft.pages=e0281604-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0281604&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA738197363%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2778914058&rft_id=info:pmid/36812194&rft_galeid=A738197363&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_0fb101c350c54c76ac5e6a7cf6428cf8&rfr_iscdi=true