The Perceived Danger (PD) Scale: Development and Validation

There are currently no psychometrically valid tools to measure the perceived danger of robots. To fill this gap, we provided a definition of perceived danger and developed and validated a 12-item bifactor scale through four studies. An exploratory factor analysis revealed four subdimensions of perceived danger: affective states, physical vulnerability, ominousness, and cognitive readiness. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the bifactor model. We then compared the perceived danger scale to the Godspeed perceived safety scale and found that the perceived danger scale is a better predictor of empirical data. We also validated the scale in an in-person setting and found that the perceived danger scale is sensitive to robot speed manipulations, consistent with previous empirical findings. Results across experiments suggest that the perceived danger scale is reliable, valid, and an adequate predictor of both perceived safety and perceived danger in human-robot interaction contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-03-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/hri61500.2025.10973898
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.42

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Perceived Danger (PD) Scale: Development and Validation

Erika Roesler, J. Malcolm McCurry, J. Gregory Trafton, Nathaniel Gyory et al.
4 citations
Traumatic Brain Injury Research
5.42
article

The Perceived Danger (PD) Scale: Development and Validation

Erika Roesler, J. Malcolm McCurry, J. Gregory Trafton, Nathaniel Gyory, Jaclyn Molan, Laura Saad
article en
4 citations

Abstract

There are currently no psychometrically valid tools to measure the perceived danger of robots. To fill this gap, we provided a definition of perceived danger and developed and validated a 12-item bifactor scale through four studies. An exploratory factor analysis revealed four subdimensions of perceived danger: affective states, physical vulnerability, ominousness, and cognitive readiness. A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the bifactor model. We then compared the perceived danger scale to the Godspeed perceived safety scale and found that the perceived danger scale is a better predictor of empirical data. We also validated the scale in an in-person setting and found that the perceived danger scale is sensitive to robot speed manipulations, consistent with previous empirical findings. Results across experiments suggest that the perceived danger scale is reliable, valid, and an adequate predictor of both perceived safety and perceived danger in human-robot interaction contexts.

United States Naval Research Laboratory (US), George Mason University (US)
U.S. Navy
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Traumatic Brain Injury Research
5.42
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.