Stores are Liable for Their Robots!? An Empirical Study on Liability in HRI with an Anthropomorphic Frontline Service Robot

Abstract

Everyday life scenarios where non-expert users (e.g., customers) are confronted with frontline service robots will become more and more likely. In particular, misunderstandings and incidents may occur during these interactions because of wrong expectations of the robot’s capabilities. Current applicable laws are based on technological assumptions from prior decades unsuitable to modern robotics and AI. The new AI Act as a part of the solution to this is still in development. In addition to the pure legal view, a technological viewpoint may be beneficial for establishing a fitting, trustful, and, thus, acceptable technology liability law. This work contributes to this by empirically evaluating the service robot non-expert user’s liability expectations, the use of robots, and well-being. The results in a DIY store environment significantly show that the store deploying the robot should be liable if an incident happens. Further, we examined that even a minor simulated incident affected the participants’ emotions and moods. Consequently, this influences their perception of liability while not mitigating their acceptance of frontline service robots.