Source assessmentContext only
DRS Biennial Conferences: Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice
robot trust animal analogiesAcademic
Assessment outcome
total 1/4 (actionability 1 + authority 0); currency unscored, so pro-rated to 1.5/6
Total1/6
Actionability1/2
Authority0/2
Currency—
Authorship & scope
Attribution (G4 evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuer authority (evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuers, who it governs, legal force and content are on the full record.
Eligibility gates
G1 · Retrievablepass
Passed in screening.
G2 · AI nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G3 · Governance nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G4 · Attributablepass
Passed in screening.
G5 · In forcepass
Passed in screening.
Scored criteria
Actionability
1/2No rationale recorded.
suggest how animal system models can be used as analogies and practical design features for the design of robot systems in order to increase trust.
Authority
0/2No rationale recorded.
Authors Suvi Hyökki, University of Lapland, Finland Follow Elizabeth K. Phillips, George Mason University Follow Lydia Melles, George Mason University Follow Michael Laakasuo, University of Turku; University of Helsinki
Currency
—No rationale recorded.
Classification
Coverage topicrobot trust animal analogies
PerspectiveAcademic
Lifecycle stage1 Plan & design
Layerboth
GranularityNot recorded