ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2025
Should robots display what they hear? Mishearing as a practical accomplishment.
Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As a contribution to research on transparency and failures in human-robot interaction (HRI), our study investigates whether the informational ecology configured by publicly displaying a robot's automatic speech recognition (ASR) results is consequential in how miscommunications emerge and are dealt with. After a preliminary quantitative analysis of our participants' gaze behavior during an experiment where they interacted with a conversational robot, we rely on a micro-analytic approach to detail how the interpretation of this robot's conduct as inadequate was configured by what it displayed as having "heard" on its tablet. We investigate cases where an utterance or gesture by the robot was treated by participants as sequentially relevant only as long as they had not read the automatic speech recognition transcript but re-evaluated it as troublesome once they had read it. In doing so, we contribute to HRI by showing that systematically displaying an ASR transcript can play a crucial role in participants' interpretation of a co-constructed action (such as shaking hands with a robot) as having "failed". We demonstrate that "mistakes" and "errors" can be approached as practical accomplishments that emerge as such over the course of interaction rather than as social or technical phenomena pre-categorized by the researcher in reference to criteria exogenous to the activity being analyzed. In the end, while narrowing down on two video fragments, we find that this peculiar informational ecology did not merely impact how the robot was responded to. Instead, it modified the very definition of "mutual understanding" that was enacted and oriented to as relevant by the human participants in these fragments. Besides social robots, we caution that systematically providing such transcripts is a design decision not to be taken lightly; depending on the setting, it may have unintended consequences on interactions between humans and any form of conversational interface.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.