Psychophysiological markers of trust in automation: insights from ERP responses in a modified flanker task.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Mallory C Stites, Laura E Matzen, Breannan C Howell, Danielle S Dickson
{"title":"Psychophysiological markers of trust in automation: insights from ERP responses in a modified flanker task.","authors":"Mallory C Stites, Laura E Matzen, Breannan C Howell, Danielle S Dickson","doi":"10.1186/s41235-026-00716-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the sensitivity of event-related potentials (ERP) to factors influencing trust in machine learning (ML) automation, specifically ML reliability, bias, and transparency, with the goal of identifying an electrophysiological marker of trust in automation. Participants performed a flanker task and observed a simulated ML algorithm perform a modified flanker task, while ERP data were collected. The performance flanker task showed canonical patterns in behavioral responses, including fewer errors and shorter response times to congruent trials. We also observed the expected ERP components, including the error-related negativity (ERN) and positivity (Pe), alongside a significant late positive component (LPC) associated with error processing. Contrary to predictions, no differences in oERN amplitudes were observed across model error conditions. The oPe component was elicited by model errors, yet was insensitive to model reliability or bias. Notably, an LPC was also observed to model errors and was larger for errors from the more reliable model (90% vs. 60%). LPC amplitude was negatively correlated with subjective trust ratings in the 60% reliable biased condition, indicating that reduced LPC effects were associated with higher trust levels. These implications of these results are discussed in the context of the P3b and P600 ERP components. Additionally, there were no effects of model transparency on ERP results or subjective trust ratings, suggesting that trust is primarily developed through direct observation of model performance. Our results contribute to understanding the neural mechanisms underlying trust in automation, highlighting the potential of ERP methodologies to advance our understanding in this domain.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13018513/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-026-00716-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigated the sensitivity of event-related potentials (ERP) to factors influencing trust in machine learning (ML) automation, specifically ML reliability, bias, and transparency, with the goal of identifying an electrophysiological marker of trust in automation. Participants performed a flanker task and observed a simulated ML algorithm perform a modified flanker task, while ERP data were collected. The performance flanker task showed canonical patterns in behavioral responses, including fewer errors and shorter response times to congruent trials. We also observed the expected ERP components, including the error-related negativity (ERN) and positivity (Pe), alongside a significant late positive component (LPC) associated with error processing. Contrary to predictions, no differences in oERN amplitudes were observed across model error conditions. The oPe component was elicited by model errors, yet was insensitive to model reliability or bias. Notably, an LPC was also observed to model errors and was larger for errors from the more reliable model (90% vs. 60%). LPC amplitude was negatively correlated with subjective trust ratings in the 60% reliable biased condition, indicating that reduced LPC effects were associated with higher trust levels. These implications of these results are discussed in the context of the P3b and P600 ERP components. Additionally, there were no effects of model transparency on ERP results or subjective trust ratings, suggesting that trust is primarily developed through direct observation of model performance. Our results contribute to understanding the neural mechanisms underlying trust in automation, highlighting the potential of ERP methodologies to advance our understanding in this domain.

自动化中信任的心理生理标记:来自修改侧卫任务中的ERP反应的见解。
本研究调查了事件相关电位(ERP)对影响机器学习(ML)自动化信任因素的敏感性,特别是ML可靠性、偏差和透明度,目的是确定自动化信任的电生理标记。参与者执行侧卫任务,并观察模拟ML算法执行修改后的侧卫任务,同时收集ERP数据。表现侧卫任务表现出典型的行为反应模式,包括更少的错误和更短的对一致性试验的反应时间。我们还观察到预期的ERP成分,包括与错误相关的负性(ERN)和正性(Pe),以及与错误处理相关的显著晚期正性成分(LPC)。与预测相反,在不同的模型误差条件下,没有观察到oERN振幅的差异。oPe分量由模型误差引起,但对模型可靠性或偏差不敏感。值得注意的是,LPC也被观察到模型误差,并且来自更可靠模型的误差更大(90%对60%)。在60%可靠偏差条件下,LPC振幅与主观信任等级呈负相关,表明LPC效应的降低与较高的信任水平相关。这些结果的含义在P3b和P600 ERP组件的背景下进行了讨论。此外,模型透明度对ERP结果或主观信任评级没有影响,这表明信任主要是通过直接观察模型绩效来发展的。我们的研究结果有助于理解自动化信任的神经机制,突出了ERP方法在促进我们对这一领域理解方面的潜力。
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
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
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