Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.14099 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866915119606267904 |
|---|---|
| author | Molan, Jaclyn Saad, Laura Roesler, Eileen McCurry, J. Malcolm Gyory, Nathaniel Trafton, J. Gregory |
| author_facet | Molan, Jaclyn Saad, Laura Roesler, Eileen McCurry, J. Malcolm Gyory, Nathaniel Trafton, J. Gregory |
| contents | There are currently no psychometrically valid tools to measure the perceived danger of robots. To fill this gap, we provided a definition of perceived danger and developed and validated a 12-item bifactor scale through four studies. An exploratory factor analysis revealed four subdimensions of perceived danger: affective states, physical vulnerability, ominousness, and cognitive readiness. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the bifactor model. We then compared the perceived danger scale to the Godspeed perceived safety scale and found that the perceived danger scale is a better predictor of empirical data. We also validated the scale in an in-person setting and found that the perceived danger scale is sensitive to robot speed manipulations, consistent with previous empirical findings. Results across experiments suggest that the perceived danger scale is reliable, valid, and an adequate predictor of both perceived safety and perceived danger in human-robot interaction contexts. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2501_14099 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | The Perceived Danger (PD) Scale: Development and Validation Molan, Jaclyn Saad, Laura Roesler, Eileen McCurry, J. Malcolm Gyory, Nathaniel Trafton, J. Gregory Robotics There are currently no psychometrically valid tools to measure the perceived danger of robots. To fill this gap, we provided a definition of perceived danger and developed and validated a 12-item bifactor scale through four studies. An exploratory factor analysis revealed four subdimensions of perceived danger: affective states, physical vulnerability, ominousness, and cognitive readiness. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the bifactor model. We then compared the perceived danger scale to the Godspeed perceived safety scale and found that the perceived danger scale is a better predictor of empirical data. We also validated the scale in an in-person setting and found that the perceived danger scale is sensitive to robot speed manipulations, consistent with previous empirical findings. Results across experiments suggest that the perceived danger scale is reliable, valid, and an adequate predictor of both perceived safety and perceived danger in human-robot interaction contexts. |
| title | The Perceived Danger (PD) Scale: Development and Validation |
| topic | Robotics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.14099 |