Phantom Costs in Human-Robot Interaction: A Replication Study

A recent psychology study found that people are more likely to reject an overly generous offer from an agent (human or robot) when there is no clear justification. This “money backfire effect” is said to stem from perceived phantom costs (e.g., agent's bad intentions). However, their online version provided less clear results. To test its robustness, we conducted a high-powered direct replication study aiming to know whether money backfiring and phantom costs effects occur in human-robot interaction. A human or robot offered participants a cookie with or without money. Participants had to decide whether they would eat the cookie and answer some questions regarding the scenario. Results indicated that participants perceived more phantom costs when the offer included money, negatively influencing their decisions to eat the cookie. However, participant's likelihood to eat the cookie did not differ as a function of agent and offer. This study provides new insights regarding the validity of online studies. We advise scholars to adapt their study setting regarding the effect they want to explore.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-03-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/hri61500.2025.10974228
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.32
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Phantom Costs in Human-Robot Interaction: A Replication Study

Christoph Bartneck, Andrew Vonasch, Benjamin Lebrun
3 citations
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
7.32
article

Phantom Costs in Human-Robot Interaction: A Replication Study

Christoph Bartneck, Andrew Vonasch, Benjamin Lebrun
article en
3 citations

Abstract

A recent psychology study found that people are more likely to reject an overly generous offer from an agent (human or robot) when there is no clear justification. This “money backfire effect” is said to stem from perceived phantom costs (e.g., agent's bad intentions). However, their online version provided less clear results. To test its robustness, we conducted a high-powered direct replication study aiming to know whether money backfiring and phantom costs effects occur in human-robot interaction. A human or robot offered participants a cookie with or without money. Participants had to decide whether they would eat the cookie and answer some questions regarding the scenario. Results indicated that participants perceived more phantom costs when the offer included money, negatively influencing their decisions to eat the cookie. However, participant's likelihood to eat the cookie did not differ as a function of agent and offer. This study provides new insights regarding the validity of online studies. We advise scholars to adapt their study setting regarding the effect they want to explore.

University of Canterbury (NZ)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
7.32
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Phantom Costs in Human-Robot Interaction: A Replication Study — Christoph Bartneck, Andrew Vonasch, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS