Linking precursors of interpersonal trust to human-automation trust: An expanded typology and exploratory experiment

IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Christopher S. Calhoun, P. Bobko, J. Gallimore, J. Lyons
{"title":"Linking precursors of interpersonal trust to human-automation trust: An expanded typology and exploratory experiment","authors":"Christopher S. Calhoun, P. Bobko, J. Gallimore, J. Lyons","doi":"10.1080/21515581.2019.1579730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study provides an initial experimental investigation of the extent to which well-known precursors of interpersonal trust (ability, benevolence, integrity, or ABI) will manifest when assessing trust between a human and a non-human referent (e.g. an automated aid). An additional motivation was the meta-analytic finding that the ABI model only explains about half of the variation in interpersonal trust. Based on a review of interpersonal and automation trust literatures, two additional precursors to trust – transparency and humanness – were identified and studied as exogenous variables (with A, B, and I analysed as explanatory mediators of their relationships to trust). In our experimental task, users interacted with an automated aid in decision-making scenarios to identify suspected insurgents. Results indicated that perceived humanness of the aid significantly correlated with trust in that aid (r = .364). This relationship was explained in part by perceptions of both ability and benevolence/integrity (unit-weighted average) of the aid; the latter finding suggesting that human-like intentionality attributed to the aid was a factor in automation trust. Perceived transparency also significantly correlated with trust (r = .464) although much of this relationship was explained by ability rather than benevolence/integrity. Aid reliability was also varied across the experiment. Interestingly, the explanatory power of benevolence/integrity increased when the aid’s reliability was lower, again suggesting human-like intentionality matters in automation trust models. Research and design considerations from these findings are noted.","PeriodicalId":44602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trust Research","volume":"9 1","pages":"28 - 46"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21515581.2019.1579730","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trust Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2019.1579730","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study provides an initial experimental investigation of the extent to which well-known precursors of interpersonal trust (ability, benevolence, integrity, or ABI) will manifest when assessing trust between a human and a non-human referent (e.g. an automated aid). An additional motivation was the meta-analytic finding that the ABI model only explains about half of the variation in interpersonal trust. Based on a review of interpersonal and automation trust literatures, two additional precursors to trust – transparency and humanness – were identified and studied as exogenous variables (with A, B, and I analysed as explanatory mediators of their relationships to trust). In our experimental task, users interacted with an automated aid in decision-making scenarios to identify suspected insurgents. Results indicated that perceived humanness of the aid significantly correlated with trust in that aid (r = .364). This relationship was explained in part by perceptions of both ability and benevolence/integrity (unit-weighted average) of the aid; the latter finding suggesting that human-like intentionality attributed to the aid was a factor in automation trust. Perceived transparency also significantly correlated with trust (r = .464) although much of this relationship was explained by ability rather than benevolence/integrity. Aid reliability was also varied across the experiment. Interestingly, the explanatory power of benevolence/integrity increased when the aid’s reliability was lower, again suggesting human-like intentionality matters in automation trust models. Research and design considerations from these findings are noted.
人际信任前驱与人-自动化信任的关联:扩展类型学与探索性实验
摘要本研究提供了一项初步的实验调查,以了解在评估人类和非人类参照物(如自动辅助)之间的信任时,众所周知的人际信任前兆(能力、仁爱、正直或ABI)会在多大程度上表现出来。另一个动机是元分析发现,ABI模型只解释了大约一半的人际信任变化。基于对人际和自动化信任文献的回顾,确定并研究了信任的另外两个前兆——透明度和人性——作为外生变量(a、B和I被分析为它们与信任关系的解释中介)。在我们的实验任务中,用户在决策场景中与自动辅助设备交互,以识别可疑叛乱分子。结果表明,援助的感知人性与对援助的信任显著相关(r = .364)。这种关系的部分原因是对援助的能力和仁慈/正直(单位加权平均值)的看法;后一项发现表明,援助产生的类似人类的意向性是自动化信任的一个因素。感知透明度也与信任显著相关(r = .464),尽管这种关系在很大程度上是由能力而不是仁慈/正直来解释的。援助的可靠性在整个实验中也各不相同。有趣的是,当援助的可靠性较低时,慈善/诚信的解释力会增加,这再次表明在自动化信任模型中,类似人类的意向性很重要。注意到这些发现的研究和设计考虑因素。
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
2.60
自引率
42.90%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: As an inter-disciplinary and cross-cultural journal dedicated to advancing a cross-level, context-rich, process-oriented, and practice-relevant journal, JTR provides a focal point for an open dialogue and debate between diverse researchers, thus enhancing the understanding of trust in general and trust-related management in particular, especially in its organizational and social context in the broadest sense. Through both theoretical development and empirical investigation, JTR seeks to open the "black-box" of trust in various contexts.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信