媒体如何描述人机协作，直接影响员工对风险与收益的判断。
Media Framing Moderates Risk-Benefit Perceptions and Value Tradeoffs in Human-Robot Collaboration
- 通过正/负媒体报道实验，研究不同叙事对认知的影响
- 负面报道中风险会削弱收益的积极效应，且模型解释力下降
- 正面报道使风险收益独立评估，更利于提升接受度
工业人机协作（HRC）的公众接受度受员工对风险与收益感知的影响。本研究通过预注册实验，将1150名参与者随机分配至三种工业场景（自主性、就业、安全）下的正向或负向媒体报道情境，使用可靠量表测量其感知风险、收益及整体价值。结果表明：在正向框架下，风险（β = -0.52）和收益（β = 0.45）均显著正向预测价值，且无交互作用；在负向框架下，二者主效应更强（风险β = -0.69，收益β = 0.63），且存在显著负向交互（β = -0.32），说明高风险会削弱收益的积极作用。正向框架模型拟合优度更高（R² = 0.715），负向框架较低（R² = 0.583）。结论显示，媒体叙事不仅影响绝对评价，还改变风险与收益的认知整合方式：负向叙事导致强但相互制约的评估，正向叙事支持独立加法式评价。该发现强调战略传播在推动HRC接受中的关键作用，并呼吁未来研究纳入叙事框架因素。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Public acceptance of industrial human-robot collaboration (HRC) is shaped by how risks and benefits are perceived by affected employees. Positive or negative media framing may shape and shift how individuals evaluate HRC. This study examines how message framing moderates the effects of perceived risks and perceived benefits on overall attributed value. In a pre-registered study, participants (N = 1150) were randomly assigned to read either a positively or negatively framed newspaper article in one of three industrial contexts (autonomy, employment, safety) about HRC in production. Subsequently, perceived risks, benefits, and value were measured using reliable and publicly available psychometric scales. Two multiple regressions (one per framing condition) tested for main and interaction effects. Framing influenced absolute evaluations of risk, benefits, and value. In both frames, risks and benefits significantly predicted attributed value. Under positive framing, only main effects were observed (risks: beta = -0.52; benefits: beta = 0.45). Under negative framing, both predictors had stronger main effects (risks: beta = -0.69; benefits: beta = 0.63) along with a significant negative interaction (beta = -0.32), indicating that higher perceived risk diminishes the positive effect of perceived benefits. Model fit was higher for the positive frame (R^2 = 0.715) than for the negative frame (R^2 = 0.583), indicating greater explained variance in value attributions. Framing shapes the absolute evaluation of HRC and how risks and benefits are cognitively integrated in trade-offs. Negative framing produces stronger but interdependent effects, whereas positive framing supports additive evaluations. These findings highlight the role of strategic communication in fostering acceptance of HRC and underscore the need to consider framing in future HRC research.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。