Deep Tech

The Robot Anxiety Gap: Why Countries With Fewer Robots Fear Them More

A global survey shows robot anxiety drops when people encounter robots in real life

Updated

March 13, 2026 2:25 PM

Ameca the humanoid robot, featuring a grey rubber face. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK

People often assume robots make people uneasy everywhere. But a new global study suggests something more nuanced. Robot anxiety tends to be highest in places where people rarely see robots in real life. Where robots are more visible, attitudes are often far more positive. That insight comes from a global study by Hexagon AB, which surveyed 18,000 participants across nine major markets. The research explored how adults and children think about robots and how those views change depending on everyday exposure.

In the United Kingdom, anxiety about robots is the highest among the countries studied. Around 52% of adults say they feel worried that something might go wrong when they think about interacting with or working alongside robots. South Korea sits at the other end of the spectrum, with only 29% reporting similar concerns. One factor appears to explain much of the gap: familiarity.

British adults are among the least likely to have encountered robots in real life. Only about 30% say they have seen or used one. In contrast, countries where robots are more visible tend to report greater comfort. China offers the clearest example. Around 75% of adults there say they have seen or interacted with robots. At the same time, 81% say they feel excited about the technology’s future potential.

The study suggests that attitudes toward robots are not fixed. Instead, they shift depending on where people encounter them and what tasks they perform. When robots are seen solving clear, practical problems, confidence tends to rise.

Across the surveyed countries, adults report the highest comfort levels with robots working in factories and warehouses. Around 63% say they are comfortable with robots in those environments. These are settings where tasks are clearly defined and safety standards are well understood. Acceptance drops in more personal spaces. Only 46% say they feel comfortable with robots in the home, while comfort falls further to 39% when robots are imagined in classrooms.

In other words, context matters. People appear more willing to accept robots when they take on physically demanding or dangerous work. Half of the respondents say improved safety is one of the main advantages of robotics in those environments. A similar share point to productivity gains as another benefit. Another finding challenges a common assumption about public fears. Job loss is often described as the biggest concern surrounding robotics. But the study suggests security risk worries people more.

Around 51% of adults say their biggest concern about robots at work is the possibility that the machines could be hacked or misused. That fear outweighs worries about physical malfunction or injury, which stand at 41%. Concerns about being replaced at work appear at the same level.

For many respondents, the issue is not simply whether robots can perform tasks. It is whether the systems controlling them are secure. According to researchers involved in the study, these concerns reflect how people evaluate emerging technologies. Instead of having a single opinion about robotics, people tend to judge each situation individually.

A robot helping assemble products in a factory may feel acceptable. The same technology operating in more sensitive environments can raise different questions. Dr. Jim Everett, an associate professor in moral psychology, says trust in artificial intelligence and robotics is often misunderstood. People are not simply asking whether they trust the technology, he notes. They are thinking about specific tools performing specific roles.

A robot assisting in a classroom or helping in healthcare carries different expectations than an AI system used in defense or surveillance. Even though these technologies are often grouped together in public debates, people evaluate them differently depending on their purpose.

Finally, the study also highlights another important factor shaping public attitudes: experience. When people actually encounter robots, fear often declines. Michael Szollosy, a robotics researcher involved in the project, says reactions tend to change quickly when individuals meet a robot for the first time.

The idea of an autonomous machine can feel intimidating in theory. But when people see a small service robot or an industrial machine performing a straightforward task, the reaction is often much calmer. Exposure can shift perceptions from abstract fears to practical understanding.

That shift matters because robotics is moving steadily into everyday environments. From manufacturing and logistics to healthcare and public services, machines capable of autonomous or semi-autonomous work are becoming more common.

As that happens, the study suggests public confidence may depend less on technical breakthroughs and more on visibility and transparency. Burkhard Boeckem, chief technology officer at Hexagon AB, argues that trust grows when people understand what robots are designed to do and where their limits lie.

Anxiety tends to increase when systems feel invisible or poorly understood. Clear boundaries and clear explanations can have the opposite effect. When people see robots working safely alongside humans, performing well-defined tasks and operating within clear rules, the technology becomes easier to accept.

In that sense, the future of robotics may depend as much on public familiarity as on engineering. The machines themselves are advancing quickly. But the relationship between humans and robots is still being negotiated. For now, the study offers a simple insight: the more people encounter robots in everyday life, the less mysterious they become. And once the mystery fades, the conversation often changes from fear to curiosity.

Keep Reading

Artificial Intelligence

Next Gen Gates: AI Meets Fashion – Gates’ Bold Move to Dress the Future

With Phia’s AI, the new luxury is knowing what’s worth buying

Updated

February 10, 2026 12:56 PM

Phoebe Gates and Sophia Kianni, founders of Phia. PHOTO: PHIA

AI has transformed how we shop—predicting trends, powering virtual try-ons and streamlining fashion logistics. Yet some of the biggest pain points remain: endless scrolling, too many tabs and never knowing if you’ve overpaid. That’s the gap Phia aims to close.

Co-founded by Phoebe Gates, daughter of Bill Gates, and climate activist Sophia Kianni, Phia was born in a Stanford dorm room and launched in April 2025. The app, available on mobile and as a browser extension, compares prices across over 40,000 retailers and thrift platforms to show what an item really costs. Its hallmark feature, “Should I Buy This?”, instantly flags whether something is overpriced, fair or a genuine deal.

The mission is simple: make shopping smarter, fairer and more sustainable. In just five months, Phia has attracted more than 500,000 users, indexed billions of products and built over 5,000 brand partnerships. It also secured a US$8 million seed round led by Kleiner Perkins, joined by Hailey Bieber, Kris Jenner, Sara Blakely and Sheryl Sandberg—investors who bridge tech, retail and culture. “Phia is redefining how people make purchase decisions,” said Annie Case, partner at Kleiner Perkins.  

Phia’s AI engine scans real-time data from more than 250 million products across its network, including Vestiaire Collective, StockX, eBay and Poshmark. Beyond comparing prices, the app helps users discover cheaper or more sustainable options by displaying pre-owned items next to new ones—helping users see the full spectrum of choices before they buy. It also evaluates how different brands perform over time, analysing how well their products hold resale value. This insight helps shoppers judge whether a purchase is likely to last in value or if opting for a second-hand version makes more sense. The result is a platform that naturally encourages circular shopping—keeping items in use longer through resale, repair or recycling—and resonates strongly with Gen Z and millennial values of sustainability and mindful spending.  

By encouraging transparency and smarter choices, Phia signals a broader shift in consumer technology: one where AI doesn’t just automate decisions but empowers users to understand them. Instead of merely digitizing the act of shopping, Phia embodies data-driven accountability—using intelligent search to help consumers make informed and ethical choices in markets long clouded by complexity. Retail analysts believe this level of visibility could push brands to maintain accurate and competitive pricing. Skeptics, however, argue that Phia must evolve beyond comparison to create emotional connection and loyalty. Still, one fact stands out: algorithms are no longer just recommending what we buy—they’re rewriting how we decide.  

With new funding powering GPU expansion and advanced personalization tools, Phia’s next step is to build a true AI shopping agent—one that helps people buy better, live smarter and rethink what it means to shop with purpose.