Interactive AI systems such as voice assistants are bound to make errors because of imperfect sensing and reasoning. Prior human-AI interaction research has illustrated the importance of various strategies for error mitigation in repairing the perception of an AI following a breakdown in service. These strategies include explanations, monetary rewards, and apologies. This paper extends prior work on error mitigation by exploring how different methods of apology conveyance may affect people’s perceptions of AI agents; we report an online study (N=37) that examines how varying the sincerity of an apology and the assignment of blame (on either the agent itself or others) affects participants’ perceptions and experience with erroneous AI agents. We found that agents that openly accepted the blame and apologized sincerely for mistakes were thought to be more intelligent, likeable, and effective in recovering from errors than agents that shifted the blame to others.

Social agents and robots are moving into front-line positions in brick and mortar services, taking on roles where they directly interact with customers. These agents could potentially recognize customers to personalize service. Will customers like this, or might they feel monitored and profiled? Robots could also re-embody (move their “personality” between one body and another) in order to take on multiple roles that are typically performed by different people. Will this make customers feel more taken care of, or will it raise concerns about the robot’s competence and expertise? Our work investigates when robots should and should not recognize customers and re-embody. Our online study used storyboards to present possible future interactions between robots and customers across several different service contexts. Our findings suggest that people generally accept robots identifying customers and taking on vastly different roles. However, in some contexts, these robot behaviors seem creepy and untrustworthy.