眼睛有吗?眼动追踪在自动化信任测量中的应用综述。

IF 2.9 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Jessica R Lee, Robert S Gutzwiller
{"title":"眼睛有吗?眼动追踪在自动化信任测量中的应用综述。","authors":"Jessica R Lee, Robert S Gutzwiller","doi":"10.1177/00187208251348395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveWe conducted a literature review investigating the validity of eye tracking metrics appropriately representing trust in automation.BackgroundAs researchers grow interested in measuring trust in automation, there has been a need to find a reliable and accurate measurement tool. Many articles have measured automation trust using eye tracking, assuming that as trust increases, visual attention from eye tracking metrics decreases. Eye tracking is an attractive potential measure for its nonintrusive and objective nature.MethodIn this systematic literature review, we looked at studies that have tested the relationship between eye tracking and trust to determine its validity and reliability.ResultsAcross 22 articles that investigated the relationship between trust and eye tracking, only about half found a negative significant relationship, whereas the other half found no relationship at all.ConclusionThe relationship between automation trust and eye tracking is inconsistent and unreliable. A wide variety of trust and eye tracking metrics were used, but only about half of the papers found any kind of relationship. The relationship did not appear robust enough to prevail when different eye tracking and trust metrics were applied in various study designs.ApplicationAn effective eye tracking-trust relationship would be useful in various applications (e.g., autonomous driving). Further, this relationship is crucial when there is a clear distinction between attention allocated to automated components of a system (e.g., car display) and unrelated displays to allow for an easy separation of a location associated with high trust versus low trust.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"187208251348395"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do the Eyes Have It? A Review of Using Eye Tracking for Automation Trust Measurement.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica R Lee, Robert S Gutzwiller\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187208251348395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>ObjectiveWe conducted a literature review investigating the validity of eye tracking metrics appropriately representing trust in automation.BackgroundAs researchers grow interested in measuring trust in automation, there has been a need to find a reliable and accurate measurement tool. Many articles have measured automation trust using eye tracking, assuming that as trust increases, visual attention from eye tracking metrics decreases. Eye tracking is an attractive potential measure for its nonintrusive and objective nature.MethodIn this systematic literature review, we looked at studies that have tested the relationship between eye tracking and trust to determine its validity and reliability.ResultsAcross 22 articles that investigated the relationship between trust and eye tracking, only about half found a negative significant relationship, whereas the other half found no relationship at all.ConclusionThe relationship between automation trust and eye tracking is inconsistent and unreliable. A wide variety of trust and eye tracking metrics were used, but only about half of the papers found any kind of relationship. The relationship did not appear robust enough to prevail when different eye tracking and trust metrics were applied in various study designs.ApplicationAn effective eye tracking-trust relationship would be useful in various applications (e.g., autonomous driving). Further, this relationship is crucial when there is a clear distinction between attention allocated to automated components of a system (e.g., car display) and unrelated displays to allow for an easy separation of a location associated with high trust versus low trust.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"187208251348395\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251348395\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251348395","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的对眼动追踪指标的有效性进行文献综述,探讨眼动追踪指标对自动化信任的影响。随着研究人员对测量自动化中的信任越来越感兴趣,需要找到一种可靠而准确的测量工具。许多文章使用眼动追踪来测量自动化信任,假设随着信任的增加,眼动追踪指标的视觉注意力会减少。眼动追踪因其非侵入性和客观性而成为一种极具吸引力的潜在测量方法。方法在这篇系统的文献综述中,我们研究了已经测试了眼动追踪和信任之间关系的研究,以确定其有效性和可靠性。结果在22篇研究信任和眼球追踪之间关系的文章中,只有大约一半的文章发现了显著的负相关,而另一半则没有发现任何关系。结论自动化信任与眼动追踪的关系不一致且不可靠。研究人员使用了各种各样的信任和眼动追踪指标,但只有大约一半的论文发现了这种关系。当在不同的研究设计中应用不同的眼动追踪和信任指标时,这种关系似乎不够牢固。有效的眼动追踪-信任关系将在各种应用(例如,自动驾驶)中非常有用。此外,当将注意力分配给系统的自动化组件(例如,汽车显示器)和不相关的显示器之间存在明显区别时,这种关系至关重要,以便轻松区分与高信任相关的位置与低信任相关的位置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do the Eyes Have It? A Review of Using Eye Tracking for Automation Trust Measurement.

ObjectiveWe conducted a literature review investigating the validity of eye tracking metrics appropriately representing trust in automation.BackgroundAs researchers grow interested in measuring trust in automation, there has been a need to find a reliable and accurate measurement tool. Many articles have measured automation trust using eye tracking, assuming that as trust increases, visual attention from eye tracking metrics decreases. Eye tracking is an attractive potential measure for its nonintrusive and objective nature.MethodIn this systematic literature review, we looked at studies that have tested the relationship between eye tracking and trust to determine its validity and reliability.ResultsAcross 22 articles that investigated the relationship between trust and eye tracking, only about half found a negative significant relationship, whereas the other half found no relationship at all.ConclusionThe relationship between automation trust and eye tracking is inconsistent and unreliable. A wide variety of trust and eye tracking metrics were used, but only about half of the papers found any kind of relationship. The relationship did not appear robust enough to prevail when different eye tracking and trust metrics were applied in various study designs.ApplicationAn effective eye tracking-trust relationship would be useful in various applications (e.g., autonomous driving). Further, this relationship is crucial when there is a clear distinction between attention allocated to automated components of a system (e.g., car display) and unrelated displays to allow for an easy separation of a location associated with high trust versus low trust.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
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