人际影响问题:人-人-人工智能团队中的信任传染与修复

Emanuel Rojas, Debbie Hsu, Jingjing Huang, Mengyao Li
{"title":"人际影响问题:人-人-人工智能团队中的信任传染与修复","authors":"Emanuel Rojas,&nbsp;Debbie Hsu,&nbsp;Jingjing Huang,&nbsp;Mengyao Li","doi":"10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As human-AI teams (HATs) become prevalent to enhance team performance, the interaction of multi-human-AI teams have been understudied, particularly how human interactions affect trust in AI teammates. This study investigated whether trust in AI can be contagious from human to human and whether this effect, named <em>trust contagion</em>, can be served as a trust repair strategy in multi-human-AI teams. Using a 2 (AI reliability: high and low, within-participants factor) × 3 (confederate trusting: trusting, neutral, distrusting, between-participants factor) mixed design, participants teamed up with a confederate and an AI teammate in a cooperative trust-based resource allocation game. Self-reported, behavioral, and conversational data were collected. We found that trust is contagious, yet positive and negative trust contagion effects were asymmetrical. While participants teamed with the trusting confederate used more positive words and showed high reliance and self-reported trust in the AI despite its errors, those teamed with the distrusting confederate showed only a significant decrease in reliance. Our results further show positive trust contagion can be used as a trust repair mechanism to mitigate trust drop after trust violations. Additionally, negative trust contagion showed modality-dependent effects, specifically in behavior. Positive trust contagion was advantageous when the AI is unreliable, while negative trust contagion was effective in decreasing reliance when the AI was performing well. Trust contagion was explained through interpersonal trust between participant and confederate mediated by confederate-trusting levels and trust in AI. Our research extends trust beyond dyadic interactions to convey trust is contagious from humans and can repair trust.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100324,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100194"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interpersonal influence matters: Trust contagion and repair in human-human-AI team\",\"authors\":\"Emanuel Rojas,&nbsp;Debbie Hsu,&nbsp;Jingjing Huang,&nbsp;Mengyao Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>As human-AI teams (HATs) become prevalent to enhance team performance, the interaction of multi-human-AI teams have been understudied, particularly how human interactions affect trust in AI teammates. This study investigated whether trust in AI can be contagious from human to human and whether this effect, named <em>trust contagion</em>, can be served as a trust repair strategy in multi-human-AI teams. Using a 2 (AI reliability: high and low, within-participants factor) × 3 (confederate trusting: trusting, neutral, distrusting, between-participants factor) mixed design, participants teamed up with a confederate and an AI teammate in a cooperative trust-based resource allocation game. Self-reported, behavioral, and conversational data were collected. We found that trust is contagious, yet positive and negative trust contagion effects were asymmetrical. While participants teamed with the trusting confederate used more positive words and showed high reliance and self-reported trust in the AI despite its errors, those teamed with the distrusting confederate showed only a significant decrease in reliance. Our results further show positive trust contagion can be used as a trust repair mechanism to mitigate trust drop after trust violations. Additionally, negative trust contagion showed modality-dependent effects, specifically in behavior. Positive trust contagion was advantageous when the AI is unreliable, while negative trust contagion was effective in decreasing reliance when the AI was performing well. Trust contagion was explained through interpersonal trust between participant and confederate mediated by confederate-trusting levels and trust in AI. Our research extends trust beyond dyadic interactions to convey trust is contagious from humans and can repair trust.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100324,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100194\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"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/S2949882125000787\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949882125000787","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着人类-人工智能团队(hat)变得普遍,以提高团队绩效,多人类-人工智能团队的互动已经得到了充分的研究,特别是人类互动如何影响对人工智能团队成员的信任。本研究探讨了对人工智能的信任是否会在人与人之间传染,以及这种被称为信任传染的效应是否可以作为多人人工智能团队的信任修复策略。采用2(人工智能可靠性:高、低,参与者内部因素)× 3(同盟者信任:信任、中立、不信任、参与者之间因素)混合设计,参与者与一个同盟者和一个人工智能队友在基于合作信任的资源分配博弈中组队。收集了自我报告、行为和会话数据。我们发现信任具有传染性,但信任的正传染效应和负传染效应是不对称的。与信任同盟者一组的参与者使用了更多积极的词汇,并对人工智能表现出高度的依赖和自我报告的信任,尽管人工智能存在错误,但与不信任同盟者一组的参与者仅表现出显著的依赖性下降。我们的研究结果进一步表明,积极的信任传染可以作为信任修复机制来缓解信任违约后的信任下降。此外,负信任传染表现出模式依赖效应,特别是在行为上。当人工智能不可靠时,正信任传染是有利的,而当人工智能表现良好时,负信任传染是有效的。信任传染可以通过被试与同盟者之间的人际信任来解释,这种信任受同盟者信任水平和人工智能信任的调节。我们的研究将信任扩展到二元互动之外,以表明信任是具有传染性的,并且可以修复信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interpersonal influence matters: Trust contagion and repair in human-human-AI team
As human-AI teams (HATs) become prevalent to enhance team performance, the interaction of multi-human-AI teams have been understudied, particularly how human interactions affect trust in AI teammates. This study investigated whether trust in AI can be contagious from human to human and whether this effect, named trust contagion, can be served as a trust repair strategy in multi-human-AI teams. Using a 2 (AI reliability: high and low, within-participants factor) × 3 (confederate trusting: trusting, neutral, distrusting, between-participants factor) mixed design, participants teamed up with a confederate and an AI teammate in a cooperative trust-based resource allocation game. Self-reported, behavioral, and conversational data were collected. We found that trust is contagious, yet positive and negative trust contagion effects were asymmetrical. While participants teamed with the trusting confederate used more positive words and showed high reliance and self-reported trust in the AI despite its errors, those teamed with the distrusting confederate showed only a significant decrease in reliance. Our results further show positive trust contagion can be used as a trust repair mechanism to mitigate trust drop after trust violations. Additionally, negative trust contagion showed modality-dependent effects, specifically in behavior. Positive trust contagion was advantageous when the AI is unreliable, while negative trust contagion was effective in decreasing reliance when the AI was performing well. Trust contagion was explained through interpersonal trust between participant and confederate mediated by confederate-trusting levels and trust in AI. Our research extends trust beyond dyadic interactions to convey trust is contagious from humans and can repair 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
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