<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>A Global Workspace Theory Model for Trust Estimation in Human-Robot Interaction</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Antonio Ch</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Global Workspace Theory Cognitive Robotics</string-name>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Dipartimento di Ingegneria, Universita degli Studi di Palermo</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Palermo</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>ICAR-CNR, Istituto di Calcolo e Reti ad Alte Prestazioni</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Palermo</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Manchester</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="UK">United Kingdom</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Successful and genuine social connections between humans are based on trust, even more when the people involved have to collaborate to reach a shared goal. With the advent of new ndings and technologies in the eld of robotics, it appears that this same key factor that regulates relationships between humans also applies with the same importance to human-robot interactions (HRI). Previous studies have proven the usefulness of a robot able to estimate the trustworthiness of its human collaborators and in this position paper we discuss a method to extend an existing state-of-the-art trust model with considerations based on social cues such as emotions. The proposed model follows the Global Workspace Theory (GWT) principles to build a novel system able to combine multiple specialised expert systems to determine whether the partner can be considered trustworthy or not. Positive results would demonstrate the usefulness of using constructive biases to enhance the teaming skills of social robots.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Trust</kwd>
        <kwd>Emotions</kwd>
        <kwd>Mind</kwd>
        <kwd>Human-Robot Interaction</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        Most of our lives depend on trust: our ability to manage it, granting or
denying it whenever appropriate, is critical for our safety and well-being during our
everyday lives. Misplaced trust can have catastrophic e ects over our physical,
emotional or economic welfare. Being such an important factor for humans, it
is natural to think that it would also bene t the social robots we are hoping
to involve in our future relationships. In particular, regarding shared goal
scenarios where a human and a robot need to interact and collaborate to achieve
a common objective, it is important that both the involved agents are able to
estimate the trustworthiness of each other so to adopt the best decisions that
would ensure the successful completion of the task. Castelfranchi and Falcone
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] argue about the importance of trust in the context of society: we, as humans,
use it to de ne our behaviour, to guide our decisions and in general to build
successful relationships. The use of trust dynamics doesn't have to be limited
to human interactions but can be extended, with all its virtues, to relationships
with arti cial agents. Because of this, robots could improve their performance
by being able to perform decisions based on trust.
      </p>
      <p>
        In this paper we focus on the trust that is assigned from a robot to a human,
that means that the former will be the trustor and the latter will be the trustee.
We consider an existing computational model of trust and Theory of Mind (ToM)
proposed by Vinanzi et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ] and we propose an extension which re nes the
trust estimation procedure by taking into account several social cues, as for
example emotions and gaze direction. Our objective is to overcome the two main
limitations of this current model, which are: the unimodality of the perceptual
information used and its sole reliance on personal experience. The architecture
we propose uses machine learning techniques to gather the previously mentioned
social features from an HRI scenario and uses the GWT principles to determine
whether the partner should be trusted or not during the joint action engagement.
      </p>
      <p>
        This proposal paper is structured as follows. Section 2 provides an overview
of the current literature into which this work taps in. Section 3 describes our
proposed design of a cognitive architecture that makes use of GWT to extend
Vinanzi's model [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ], Finally, Section 4 provides a discussion on the expected
results, the future works and places this piece of research in a wider, incremental
project.
2
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Theoretical Background</title>
      <p>
        Trust has been studied extensively by a wide range of researchers spacing across
di erent elds including but not limited to psychology, computer science,
business and law [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ]. The interdisciplinary interest towards this topic is indicative
of its importance on many levels of human society. Mayer [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ] de nes trust as
the willingness of a party (the trustor) to rely on the actions of another party
(the trustee) with the former having no control over the latter. In other words,
in a trust-based scenario the trustor accepts a vulnerability in hope of a
positive but uncontrolled outcome. This is particularly true regarding teaming and
cooperation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        It has been demonstrated that the ability to correctly judge the
trustworthiness of others is strongly correlated to a cognitive skill known as Theory of Mind
(ToM): the ability to attribute mental states to others (for instance intentions,
beliefs and desires), that may di er from one's owns [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>
        ]. Vanderbilt [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
        ] proved
that this skill gradually develops through childhood and matures fully around
the fth year of age by designing an experiment involving a sticker nding game:
some children of di erent ages needed to locate a sticker hidden in one of two
locations by relying on the suggestion provided by an adult, who could either be
a helper or a tricker. The children had time to familiarise with their informant
and subsequently decide whether to trust them or not based on the experienced
behaviour.
      </p>
      <p>
        Whereas trust is fundamental in human relationships, it's also a key factor
in HRI: a lack of trust in the robot's skills or, vice versa, an overestimation of
it's capabilities can both negatively impact the cooperation's performance. Just
as human relationships are never unidirectional, even those with robots should
be: previous works have addressed the importance of models of trust in cognitive
robotics. We will focus in particular on an integrated model of trust and Theory
of Mind (ToM) for social robots developed by Vinanzi et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ], with the aim
of extending its capabilities beyond its original scope.
      </p>
      <p>
        This model is based on an established framework known as developmental
robotics. Cangelosi [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] de nes it as \the approach to the design of behavioral
and cognitive capabilities in arti cial agents that takes direct inspiration from
the developmental principles and mechanisms observed in the natural cognitive
systems of children". Following this approach, the model is based on the same
psychology experiment performed by Vanderbilt [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
        ] to test the maturity of
ToM and is able to learn how to distinguish a trustworthy and untrustworthy
informant. To do so, the cognitive architecture makes use of an uni ed model of
trust and ToM originally developed by Patacchiola [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>
        ] based on Bayesian Belief
Networks (BBN) and extends it with episodic memory, which is a subcategory
of the long-term declarative memory that stores memories about temporally
dated episodes or events and temporal-spatial relations among them [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>
        ]. Thanks
to this extension, the robot is able to interact with informants with who it
has never familiarised, using its developmental experience to decide whether to
instinctively trust them or not.
      </p>
      <p>This model is based on the personal experience of the agent, which is
composed by its current perception and the history of its interactions with several
other agents. In other words, it uses a unimodal perception information to
produce the trust evaluation. Our plan is to further extend this model to take into
account other social cues from the human partner with the nal objective to
re ne even more the trust estimation task. We think that by transforming the
process to take into account multimodal sensory information we will be able to
achieve a much higher performance.</p>
      <p>
        According to Cho [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ], given the multidisciplinary nature of trust, di erent
kind of factors a ect its evaluation. Of these, we are going to consider the ones
which in uence cooperation and collaboration in a human-robot teaming
interaction. For example, Ekman [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ] describes how emotions and expressions
represent the key to read human intentions. Facial expressions provide behavioural
and situational information in trust contexts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ]. He has developed an \atlas of
emotions" to associate emotional feelings to emotional expressions [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>
        ]. Even
if emotions and expressions can be considered good sources of information to
predict the trustworthiness of a person, Ekman suggests to integrate other
factors, which he calls \macro-expressions" and includes: symbolic gestures, tone of
voice, demographic data and content of speech [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ]. He then presents some
ex
      </p>
      <p>Engagement
Expert System</p>
      <p>B
r
o
a
d
c
a
s
t</p>
      <p>Global Workspace
periments which demonstrate that it is possible to use these features in a human
interaction context to modify the perceived trustworthiness of someone.</p>
      <p>
        The cognitive model is extended using Trust Theory [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ], based mainly on
delegation and adoption concepts [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14 ref15 ref7">7, 14, 15</xref>
        ], and GWT. The latter is a cognitive
model proposed by Baars [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2 ref3">2, 3</xref>
        ] which is described metaphorically as a theatre
where several actors (the working memory, ensemble of expert systems)
compete between them to earn the \spotlight of selective attention" on stage (the
consciousness), while most of the background work remains invisible and behind
the stages (the unconscious) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
3
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Proposed Model</title>
      <p>
        The GWT model depends on the interaction between several specialised nodes
of a network, which are the expert systems that compete for the spotlight of the
arti cial consciousness. Figure 1 shows the proposed architecture based on GWT.
The cognitive model hosts two expert systems: the Experience Expert System
ExES and the Engagement Expert System EgES, which are described in detail
in the following Sections and are both capable of providing trust estimations.
The GW component is in charge of deciding whether to assign the spotlight to
one system or the other. This architecture is modular, meaning that the expert
systems can be changed in typology and number based on speci c needs.
The ExES [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ] is a developmental robotics cognitive architecture that enables
a robot to perform trust evaluations based on personal experience. It's core
component is a BBN that uni es trust and ToM considerations for the sticker
nding game, as described in Figure 2. Following the original ToM experiment
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
        ], it performs two main functions:
1. Familiarisation: the robot experiences some interactions with the
informants, observes the outcome of their suggestions learning who should be
considered a helper or a tricker and trains a BBN for each of them;
2. Decision making: the robot will use probabilistic inference on the BBNs
to decide whether to follow or reject the suggestion for each particular
informant. See Figure 3 for a visual demonstration applied to the Vanderbilt
experiment [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>
        ];
      </p>
      <p>
        In addition to this, and following the psychological principles of trust
development de ned by Erikson [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ], the robot is able to use its Episodic Memory to
collect all of its past experiences and decide how to act towards a novel informant
it has never familiarised with. The history of interactions shape the robots
personal character development, which will determine its attitude to instinctively
trust or distrust a stranger.
3.2
      </p>
      <p>
        Engagement Expert System
The EgES is a cognitive model under development whose purpose is to estimate
the trustworthiness of the informant using social cues. According to Ekman [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ],
emotions and micro-expressions are used as subtle hints to understand whether
someone wants to trick us. Using this principle, EgES feeds the robot's RGB
camera images and auditory perceptions to a stack of machine learning algorithms
that classify the current perception and extract a set of features for an arti
cial neural network (ANN). The latter is used to predict the appropriate level
of trust to assign to the informant under analysis. Figure 4 shows a schematic
representation of this process. The computed features are the following:
{ Emotions: the emotional state of the informant. This system classi es
emotions as sad, angry, happy, or neutral;
{ Vocal Emotions: the emotion expresses by the informant's voice signal,
without considering its content;
{ Facial Action Units: facial movements and micro-expressions;
{ Gaze: the direction of the informant's gaze, to determine if the informant
is looking directly at the robot or not;
{ Gender: di erent genders show di erences in their social cues, this feature
takes this into account;
{ Age: as above, social cues di er with age;
{ Context: the state of the environment, such as calm or agitated.
      </p>
      <p>Perceptions</p>
      <p>Emotions
Vocal Emotions
Facial Action</p>
      <p>Units
Gaze
Gender
Age
Context
Trust
At this point of the paper, it is clear that our cognitive model based on GWT
is built upon two expert systems which are able to independently estimate the
trustworthiness of another agent engaged in joint action. These two systems will
compete to earn the spotlight of selective attention by the GW, which represents
the arti cial consciousness of the system. The latter is a mathematical model
whose purpose is to select the results of either the ExES or the EgES to apply
to a speci c situation. The description of the details of this module is not in the
scope of this paper.
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Conclusion</title>
      <p>
        There is a big body of research that suggests the importance of trust in any
kind of relationship, especially between team members [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. At the moment, the
trust cognitive model by Vinanzi et al. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>
        ] is able to perform trust evaluations
based solely on past and present experiences of the involved agent, but the
implementation of both the EgES and the GW seem to be able to enhance this
decision making process by taking into account other factors that would in uence
human beings engaged in the same task, thus freeing this cognitive model from
the boundaries of personal experience.
      </p>
      <p>This is a position paper and the architecture described here is a design
proposal, so future works will include its technological implementation and the
design and execution of an HRI experiment to validate it.</p>
      <p>To do so, a SoftBank Pepper humanoid social robot will be used. The latter
is designed to operate in human environments and its interaction capabilities
make it suitable for this speci c scope.</p>
      <p>The proposed work is part of a wider project which aims to build a cognitive
architecture able to operate in a human-robot teaming interaction scenario where
robots will act in unsupervised and dynamic contexts.</p>
      <p>
        Our long-term research goal is the analysis and development of HRI systems
where the arti cial agent can collaborate and cooperate as a peer component in
a human-like fashion. The design of a wider-scale human-robot teaming system
faces several issues that must be addressed to solve the general problem. We
analysed some of these factors in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ], and we discussed a theoretical cognitive
model in [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ].
      </p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baars</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>In the theatre of consciousness. global workspace theory, a rigorous scienti c theory of consciousness</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Consciousness Studies</source>
          <volume>4</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <volume>292</volume>
          {
          <fpage>309</fpage>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baars</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>Global workspace theory of consciousness: toward a cognitive neuroscience of human experience</article-title>
          .
          <source>Progress in brain research 150</source>
          ,
          <volume>45</volume>
          {
          <fpage>53</fpage>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baars</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.J.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The global workspace theory of consciousness</article-title>
          . The Blackwell companion to consciousness pp.
          <volume>236</volume>
          {
          <issue>246</issue>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Boone</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.T.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Buck</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.:
          <article-title>Emotional expressivity and trustworthiness: The role of nonverbal behavior in the evolution of cooperation</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of Nonverbal Behavior</source>
          <volume>27</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <volume>163</volume>
          {
          <fpage>182</fpage>
          (
          <year>2003</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cangelosi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schlesinger</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Developmental robotics: From babies to robots</article-title>
          . MIT Press (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Castelfranchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Falcone</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.:
          <source>Trust Theory: A Socio-Cognitive and Computational Model</source>
          . Wiley Publishing,
          <volume>1st</volume>
          <fpage>edn</fpage>
          . (
          <year>2010</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Castelfranchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Falcone</surname>
          </string-name>
          , R.:
          <article-title>Towards a theory of delegation for agent-based systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>Robotics and Autonomous Systems</source>
          <volume>24</volume>
          (
          <issue>3-4</issue>
          ),
          <volume>141</volume>
          {
          <fpage>157</fpage>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chella</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lanza</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pipitone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Seidita</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Human-robot teaming: Perspective on analysis and implementation issues</article-title>
          . vol.
          <volume>2352</volume>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chella</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lanza</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Seidita</surname>
          </string-name>
          , V.:
          <article-title>A cognitive architecture for human-robot teaming interaction</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Arti cial Intelligence and Cognition</source>
          .
          <source>Palermo (July 2-4</source>
          <year>2018</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cho</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chan</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Adali</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>A survey on trust modeling</article-title>
          .
          <source>ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 48(2)</source>
          ,
          <volume>28</volume>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ekman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Telling lies: Clues to deceit in the marketplace, politics, and marriage (revised edition)</article-title>
          .
          <source>WW Norton &amp; Company</source>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Elkins</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Derrick</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Burgoon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nunamaker</surname>
            <given-names>Jr</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>J.F.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Predicting users' perceived trust in embodied conversational agents using vocal dynamics</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>579</volume>
          {
          <fpage>588</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>IEEE</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Erikson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Childhood and</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Society. W. W.</given-names>
            <surname>Norton</surname>
          </string-name>
          &amp; Company (
          <year>1993</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Falcone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Castelfranchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The socio-cognitive dynamics of trust: Does trust create trust? In: Trust in Cyber-societies</article-title>
          , pp.
          <volume>55</volume>
          {
          <fpage>72</fpage>
          . Springer (
          <year>2001</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Falcone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Castelfranchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Socio-cognitive model of trust</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Human Computer Interaction: Concepts</source>
          , Methodologies, Tools, and Applications, pp.
          <volume>2316</volume>
          {
          <fpage>2323</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <given-names>IGI</given-names>
            <surname>Global</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Groom</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nass</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human{robot teams</article-title>
          .
          <source>Interaction Studies</source>
          <volume>8</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <volume>483</volume>
          {
          <fpage>500</fpage>
          (
          <year>2007</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jones</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>George</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.M.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The experience and evolution of trust: Implications for cooperation and teamwork</article-title>
          .
          <source>Academy of management review 23(3)</source>
          ,
          <volume>531</volume>
          {
          <fpage>546</fpage>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mayer</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Davis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Schoorman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.D.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>An integrative model of organizational trust</article-title>
          .
          <source>Academy of management review 20(3)</source>
          ,
          <volume>709</volume>
          {
          <fpage>734</fpage>
          (
          <year>1995</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patacchiola</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cangelosi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>A developmental bayesian model of trust in arti cial cognitive systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: 2016 Joint IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning and Epigenetic Robotics (ICDL-EpiRob)</source>
          . pp.
          <volume>117</volume>
          {
          <fpage>123</fpage>
          .
          <string-name>
            <surname>IEEE</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2016</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paul</surname>
          </string-name>
          , E.:
          <article-title>Emotional and conversational nonverbal signals</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Language, knowledge, and representation</source>
          , pp.
          <volume>39</volume>
          {
          <fpage>50</fpage>
          . Springer Netherlands (
          <year>2004</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Rotenberg</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Petrocchi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lecciso</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Marchetti</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>The relation between children's trust beliefs and theory of mind abilities</article-title>
          .
          <source>Infant and Child Development</source>
          <volume>24</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <volume>206</volume>
          {
          <fpage>214</fpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tulving</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , et al.:
          <article-title>Episodic and semantic memory</article-title>
          .
          <source>Organization of memory 1</source>
          , 381{
          <fpage>403</fpage>
          (
          <year>1972</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vanderbilt</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Liu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Heyman</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.D.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>The development of distrust</article-title>
          .
          <source>Child development 82(5)</source>
          ,
          <volume>1372</volume>
          {
          <fpage>1380</fpage>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vinanzi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patacchiola</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chella</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Cangelosi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Would a robot trust you? developmental robotics model of trust and theory of mind</article-title>
          .
          <source>Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B</source>
          <volume>374</volume>
          (
          <issue>1771</issue>
          ),
          <volume>20180032</volume>
          (
          <year>2019</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>