Toward Quantifying Trust Dynamics: How People Adjust Their Trust After Moment-to-Moment Interaction With Automation
X. Jessie Yang, Christopher Schemanske, Christine Searle
University of Michigan
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
OBJECTIVE: We examine how human operators adjust their trust in automation as a result of their moment-to-moment interaction with automation. BACKGROUND: Most existing studies measured trust by administering questionnaires at the end of an experiment. Only a limited number of studies viewed trust as a dynamic variable that can strengthen or decay over time. METHOD: Seventy-five participants took part in an aided memory recognition task. In the task, participants viewed a series of images and later on performed 40 trials of the recognition task to identify a target image when it was presented with a distractor. In each trial, participants performed the initial recognition by themselves, received a recommendation from an automated decision aid, and performed the final recognition. After each trial, participants reported their trust on a visual analog scale. RESULTS: Outcome bias and contrast effect significantly influence human operators' trust adjustments. An automation failure leads to a larger trust decrement if the final outcome is undesirable, and a marginally larger trust decrement if the human operator succeeds the task by him/herself. An automation success engenders a greater trust increment if the human operator fails the task. Additionally, automation failures have a larger effect on trust adjustment than automation successes. CONCLUSION: Human operators adjust their trust in automation as a result of their moment-to-moment interaction with automation. Their trust adjustments are significantly influenced by decision-making heuristics/biases. APPLICATION: Understanding the trust adjustment process enables accurate prediction of the operators' moment-to-moment trust in automation and informs the design of trust-aware adaptive automation.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
社会科学Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Social Robot Interaction and HRI · Risk and Safety Analysis
参考文献 48
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 108
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条