Implicit neural measures of trust in artificial intelligence

Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld , Eva Wiese
{"title":"Implicit neural measures of trust in artificial intelligence","authors":"Tobias Feldmann-Wüstefeld ,&nbsp;Eva Wiese","doi":"10.1016/j.chbah.2026.100274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Trust in AI systems is critical for effective collaboration, yet traditional measures—such as self-reports and behavioral proxies—are limited in capturing its dynamic and latent nature. This study introduces the <em>contralateral delay activity</em> (CDA), a neural marker of visual working memory load, as a novel, implicit index of trust. While the CDA has been widely used in change detection tasks to track memory load, we repurpose it here to measure how many working memory resources users offload to an AI-framed automated partner. Participants performed a lateralized memory task under low and high working memory load, collaborating with an AI whose reliability was experimentally manipulated across three phases: trust formation, violation, and restoration. The system was a rule-based automated agent framed to participants as an AI collaborator, as the psychological effects of AI framing are central to trust and offloading behavior. In dyadic trials, where the AI was responsible for one hemifield, the CDA amplitude served as an index of how much information participants chose to maintain themselves versus offload to the AI. As AI reliability increased, CDA amplitude rose, indicating greater trust and reliance. When AI reliability dropped during the violation phase, participants encoded more from both hemifields, and CDA amplitude declined. During trust restoration, CDA amplitude returned to pre-violation levels, indicating renewed reliance—though it did not match the high amplitude of solo trials, suggesting lingering mistrust. Behavioral measures (e.g., reliance, compliance, response time) tracked the CDA dynamics but lacked the resolution and specificity of the CDA. Together, these results establish the CDA as a powerful neural index of dynamic cognitive offloading that closely tracks behavioral and reliability-based indicators of trust. It captures trial-by-trial fluctuations in offloading behavior that reflect users’ evolving confidence in AI assistance, offering a continuous, covert, and cognitively grounded measure of trust in interactive settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100324,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","volume":"7 ","pages":"Article 100274"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882126000253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Trust in AI systems is critical for effective collaboration, yet traditional measures—such as self-reports and behavioral proxies—are limited in capturing its dynamic and latent nature. This study introduces the contralateral delay activity (CDA), a neural marker of visual working memory load, as a novel, implicit index of trust. While the CDA has been widely used in change detection tasks to track memory load, we repurpose it here to measure how many working memory resources users offload to an AI-framed automated partner. Participants performed a lateralized memory task under low and high working memory load, collaborating with an AI whose reliability was experimentally manipulated across three phases: trust formation, violation, and restoration. The system was a rule-based automated agent framed to participants as an AI collaborator, as the psychological effects of AI framing are central to trust and offloading behavior. In dyadic trials, where the AI was responsible for one hemifield, the CDA amplitude served as an index of how much information participants chose to maintain themselves versus offload to the AI. As AI reliability increased, CDA amplitude rose, indicating greater trust and reliance. When AI reliability dropped during the violation phase, participants encoded more from both hemifields, and CDA amplitude declined. During trust restoration, CDA amplitude returned to pre-violation levels, indicating renewed reliance—though it did not match the high amplitude of solo trials, suggesting lingering mistrust. Behavioral measures (e.g., reliance, compliance, response time) tracked the CDA dynamics but lacked the resolution and specificity of the CDA. Together, these results establish the CDA as a powerful neural index of dynamic cognitive offloading that closely tracks behavioral and reliability-based indicators of trust. It captures trial-by-trial fluctuations in offloading behavior that reflect users’ evolving confidence in AI assistance, offering a continuous, covert, and cognitively grounded measure of trust in interactive settings.
人工智能中信任的内隐神经测量
对人工智能系统的信任对于有效协作至关重要,然而传统的措施——如自我报告和行为代理——在捕捉其动态和潜在性质方面是有限的。本研究将视觉工作记忆负荷的神经标记对侧延迟活动(CDA)作为一种新的内隐信任指标引入研究。虽然CDA已广泛用于变更检测任务以跟踪内存负载,但我们在这里将其重新用于测量用户将多少工作内存资源卸载给ai框架的自动化合作伙伴。参与者在低和高工作记忆负荷下进行了横向记忆任务,与人工智能合作,人工智能的可靠性在三个阶段被实验操纵:信任形成、违反和恢复。该系统是一个基于规则的自动代理,将参与者视为人工智能合作者,因为人工智能框架的心理影响对信任和卸载行为至关重要。在二元试验中,人工智能负责一个半场,CDA振幅作为参与者选择维护自己而不是将多少信息卸载给人工智能的指标。随着人工智能可靠性的提高,CDA振幅增大,表明信任和依赖程度增大。当人工智能可靠性在违反阶段下降时,参与者从两个半场编码更多,CDA振幅下降。在信任恢复过程中,CDA振幅恢复到违反前的水平,表明重新建立了依赖——尽管它与单独试验的高振幅不匹配,表明不信任挥之不去。行为测量(例如,依赖性、依从性、响应时间)跟踪CDA动态,但缺乏CDA的分辨率和特异性。总之,这些结果确立了CDA作为动态认知卸载的强大神经指标,密切跟踪基于信任的行为和可靠性指标。它捕捉了卸载行为的一次又一次波动,反映了用户对人工智能帮助的信心不断变化,在互动环境中提供了持续、隐蔽和基于认知的信任衡量标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书