> First, participants interacted with the robot in a normal setting to experience its performance, which was deliberately poor. Then, they had to decide whether

> First, participants interacted with the robot in a normal setting to experience its performance, which was deliberately poor. Then, they had to decide whether or not to follow the robot’s commands in a simulated emergency. In the latter situation, all twenty-six participants obeyed the robot, despite having observed just moments before that the robot had lousy navigational skills. The degree of trust they placed in this machine was striking: when the robot pointed to a dark room with no clear exit, the majority of people obeyed it, rather than safely exiting by the door through which they had entered. I see this all the time - people putting their faith in systems and rules and computer programs despite knowing that they're more than likely wrong in the given situation. It's bizarre.