# Hri Related Work > Use when writing or auditing the related-work and positioning of an ACM/IEEE HRI full paper — covering HRI's crossing literatures (robotics, HCI, psychology, design), writing a delta-first argument that credits each community, and keeping self-citation compatible with double-blind review. - Skill: `thedixitjain/hri-related-work` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add thedixitjain/hri-related-work` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/thedixitjain/hri-related-work/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Marketing & Growth - Author: thedixitjain (https://skillmd.com/u/thedixitjain) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/thedixitjain/hri-related-work --- # HRI Related Work An HRI related-work section has a harder job than most: it must place the paper in **several literatures at once** — robotics, HCI, psychology/cognitive science, and design — because HRI reviewers are drawn from all of them, and each expects to see their field cited correctly. A section that reads as an ICRA lit review to a psychologist (or vice versa) signals the authors do not understand the interdisciplinary conversation they are joining. This skill covers coverage, positioning, and double-blind hygiene. ## Cover the crossing literatures Map your paper to the lanes it actually touches, and cite each in that community's terms: - **HRI conference and journal core** — the directly adjacent HRI work (prior HRI/THRI/JHRI studies on your construct or interaction). This is where reviewers look first; missing the nearest HRI neighbor is the classic fatal gap. - **Robotics** — the technical substrate (perception, control, behavior generation, autonomy) your robot relies on, if the contribution is technical/systems. - **HCI** — interaction design, evaluation methods, and any general-HCI phenomenon your interaction instantiates. - **Psychology / cognitive & social science** — the theory behind your constructs (trust, mind perception, social presence, warmth/competence, persuasion), cited to its origin, not only to its HRI re-uses. - **Design** — if yours is a design contribution, the design methods and precedents (probes, research-through-design, participatory design) it builds on. You do not need every lane — you need the lanes your contribution genuinely engages, covered well enough that a reviewer from each field trusts you. ## Delta-first positioning HRI reviewers reward a crisp statement of what is **new**: - For each closest prior work, state in one sentence **what they did** and **what you do differently** — a different robot, a different measured outcome (behavior vs. attitude), a different population, a causal manipulation where they had correlation, a design where they had a study. - Prefer a **short, sharp delta** over an exhaustive survey. Eight pages do not allow a textbook review; they allow a targeted argument for why your contribution is needed. - Avoid the "no one has studied X with a robot" claim unless it is true and load-bearing — novelty of *combination* is fine, but say why the combination matters, not merely that it is unclaimed. ## Credit theory correctly (the interdisciplinary trap) The most common HRI positioning error is citing a psychological or design construct only through its HRI re-uses: - If you measure **trust**, **anthropomorphism**, **social presence**, or **persuasion**, cite the originating theory and the validated instrument, not just the last three HRI papers that used the word. A psychology reviewer notices immediately. - If you borrow a **method** (thematic analysis, mixed methods, a specific experimental paradigm), cite its methodological source so a methods reviewer trusts you are using it correctly. - Do not rename an existing construct; align your terminology with the field that owns it. ## Double-blind self-citation HRI full-paper review is **double-blind**; positioning must not de-anonymize you: - Cite your own prior work in the **third person** ("Prior work [X] found...", never "our previous work [X]"), and keep those citations in the normal reference list. - If a new submission builds directly on your unpublished or under-review work, describe the relationship without identifying the authors; do not attach an identifying tech report. - Do not remove necessary self-citations to avoid detection — a missing obvious reference is itself a signal. Anonymize the *phrasing*, not the *scholarship*. - Watch acknowledgments, grant numbers, and platform/lab names elsewhere in the paper that a related-work reviewer might connect to an author (see `hri-submission`). ## Placement and length - A **related-work section** works when the paper needs to survey a landscape; **inline positioning** (delta stated where each idea is introduced) often serves better under the 8-page budget. Choose one primary strategy; do not both survey at length and re-argue inline. - Keep related work proportional — it exists to justify the contribution, not to prove reading. If it crowds out the method or results, cut it. ## Anti-patterns HRI reviewers flag - **Single-field tunnel vision** — a robotics-only or psychology-only reference list for a paper that claims to be interdisciplinary. - **Construct laundering** — using a theoretical term (e.g., "trust") while citing only its HRI buzzword uses, not its theoretical source or validated measure. - **Survey-as-substitute** — a long neutral catalogue with no delta, leaving reviewers to guess the contribution. - **First-person self-citation** — an anonymity break hiding in the related work. ## Output format ```text [Literature lanes covered] HRI-core / robotics / HCI / psychology / design — which apply, which cited well [Nearest HRI neighbor] identified and delta stated? yes/no [Delta-first] each key prior work paired with an explicit difference? yes/no [Theory credited] constructs/methods cited to origin + validated instrument? yes/no [Double-blind] self-citations third-person; no identifying acknowledgments/labs? yes/no [Fix queue] ``` --- **Source:** [`brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills`](https://github.com/brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills) → `HRI-Skills/skills/hri-related-work/SKILL.md`