This paper presents a comprehensive investigation of personality traits related to trust in automated vehicles. A hierarchical personality model based on Mowen’s (2000) 3M model is explored in a first and replicated in a second study.
Background
Trust in automation is established in a complex psychological process involving user-, system- and situation-related variables. In this process, personality traits have been viewed as an important source of variance.
Method
Dispositional variables on three levels were included in an exploratory, hierarchical personality model (full model) of dynamic learned trust in automation, which was refined on the basis of structural equation modeling carried out in Study 1 (final model). Study 2 replicated the final model in an independent sample.
Results
In both studies, the personality model showed a good fit and explained a large proportion of variance in trust in automation. The combined evidence supports the role of extraversion, neuroticism, and self-esteem at the elemental level; affinity for technology and dispositional interpersonal trust at the situational level; and propensity to trust in automation and a priori acceptability of automated driving at the surface level in the prediction of trust in automation.
Conclusion
Findings confirm that personality plays a substantial role in trust formation and provide evidence of the involvement of user dispositions not previously investigated in relation to trust in automation: self-esteem, dispositional interpersonal trust, and affinity for technology.
Application
Implications for personalization of information campaigns, driver training, and user interfaces for trust calibration in automated driving are discussed.
AjzenI. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x
2.
AjzenI. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (2nd ed.). Open University Press.
3.
AlbarracínD.ChanM. P. S.JiangD. (2018). Attitudes and attitude change: Social and personality considerations about specific and general patterns of behavior. InK.DeuxM.Snyder (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp.439–463). Oxford University Press.
4.
AllportG. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
BentlerP. M. (1995). EQS Structural Equations Program Manual. Multivariate Software.
9.
BerenbaumH.BredemeierK.ThompsonR. J. (2008). Intolerance of uncertainty: Exploring its dimensionality and associations with need for cognitive closure, psychopathology, and personality. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2007.01.004
10.
BirosD. P.DalyM.GunschG. (2004). The influence of task load and automation trust on deception detection. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13, 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:GRUP.0000021840.85686.57
11.
BosnjakM.GalesicM.TutenT. (2007). Personality determinants of online shopping: Explaining online purchase intentions using a hierarchical approach. Journal of Business Research, 60, 597–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.008
12.
BriggsP.BurfordB.DracupC. (1998). Modelling self-confidence in users of a computer-based system showing unrepresentative design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 49, 717–742. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1998.0224
ChanceyE. T.BlissJ. P.ProapsA. B.MadhavanP. (2015). The role of trust as a mediator between system characteristics and response behaviors. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57, 947–958. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815582261
15.
ChienS. Y.SycaraK.LiuJ. S.KumruA. (2016). Relation between trust attitudes toward automation, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, and Big Five personality traits. InProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (pp.841–845). SAGE Publications.
16.
ChoiJ. K.JiY. G. (2015). Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31, 692–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549
CortinaJ. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
20.
CostaP. T.McCraeR. R. (1992). NEO PI-R professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
21.
CronbachL. J.GleserG. C. (1965). Psychological tests and personnel decisions. U. Illinois Press.
22.
CummingG. (2013). Understanding the new statistics: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta-analysis. Routledge.
23.
DavisF. D.BagozziR. P.WarshawP. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982–1003. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
24.
de VriesP.MiddenC.BouwhuisD. (2003). The effects of errors on system trust, self-confidence, and the allocation of control in route planning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00039-9
25.
DishawM.StrongD.BandyD. B. (2002). Extending the task-technology fit model with self-efficacy constructs. AMCIS 2002 Proceedings, 1021–1027.
26.
DuCetteJ.WolkS. (1973). Cognitive and motivational correlates of generalized expectancies for control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 420–426. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034486
27.
EvansA. M.RevelleW. (2008). Survey and behavioral measurements of interpersonal trust. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1585–1593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.07.011
28.
FrankeT.AttigC.WesselD. (2019). A personal resource for technology interaction: Development and validation of the Affinity for Technology Interaction (ATI) scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35, 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150
29.
GainesS. O.PanterA. T.LydeM. D.SteersW. N.RusbultC. E.CoxC. L.WexlerM. O. (1997). Evaluating the circumplexity of interpersonal traits and the manifestation of interpersonal traits in interpersonal trust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 610–623. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.610
30.
GalvinB. M.RandelA. E.CollinsB. J.JohnsonR. E. (2018). Changing the focus of locus (of control): A targeted review of the locus of control literature and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39, 820–833. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2275
31.
GoldC.KörberM.HohenbergerC.LechnerD.BenglerK. (2015). Trust in automation – before and after the experience of take-over scenarios in a highly automated vehicle. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 3025–3032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.847
32.
Gray-LittleB.WilliamsV. S. L.HancockT. D. (1997). An item response theory analysis of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 443–451. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297235001
33.
GreszkiR.MeyerM.SchoenH. (2014). The impact of speeding on data quality in non-probability and freshly recruited probability‐based online panels. InM.CallegaroR.BakerJ.BethlehemA. S.GöritzJ. A.KrosnickP. J.Lavrakas (Eds.), Online Panel Research: A Data Quality Perspective (pp.238–262). Wiley.
34.
GurtmanM. B. (1992). Trust, distrust, and interpersonal problems: A circumplex analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 989–1002. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.989
35.
HancockP. A.BillingsD. R.SchaeferK. E.ChenJ. Y. C.de VisserE. J.ParasuramanR. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 53, 517–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811417254
36.
HancockP. A.HancockG. M.WarmJ. S. (2009). Individuation: The N = 1 revolution. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 10, 481–488. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220903106387
37.
HarterS. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. InR.Baumeister (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp.87–116). Plenum.
38.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
39.
HergethS.LorenzL.VilimekR.KremsJ. F. (2016). Keep your scanners peeled: Gaze behavior as a measure of automation trust during highly automated driving. Human Factors, 58, 509–519.
40.
HerzL.GulloneE. (1999). The relationship between self-esteem and parenting style: A cross-cultural comparison of Australian and Vietnamese Australian adolescents. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 742–761.
41.
HirotoD. S. (1974). Locus of control and learned helplessness. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 187–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035910
42.
HoffK. A.BashirM. (2015). Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57, 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
43.
HolcombL. B.KingF. B.BrownS. W. (2004). Student traits and attributes contributing to the success in online courses: Evaluation of university online courses. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 2, 1–17.
44.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
45.
JianJ. Y.BisantzA. M.DruryC. G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4, 53–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327566IJCE0401_04
46.
JudgeT. A.BonoJ. E. (2001). Relationship of core self-evaluations traits—self-esteem, generalized self-efficacy, locus of control, and emotional stability—with job satisfaction and job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.80
47.
JudgeT. A.LockeE. A.DurhamC. C.KlugerA. N. (1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.1.17
48.
KarrerK.GlaserC.ClemensC.BruderC. (2009). Technikaffinität erfassen - der Fragebogen TA-EG. InA.LichtensteinC.StößelC.Clemens (Eds.), Der Mensch im Mittelpunkt technischer Systeme, 8. Berliner Werkstatt Mensch-Maschine-Systeme (pp.196–201). VDI Verlag GmbH.
49.
KörberM.BenglerK. (2014). Potential individual differences regarding automation effects in automated driving. InProceedings of the XV International Conference on Human Computer Interaction (pp.1–7). ACM.
50.
KovalevaA. (2012). The IE-4: Construction and validation of a short scale for the assessment of locus of control. 9. GESIS-Schriftenreihe. GESIS.
51.
KovalevaA.BeierleinC.KemperC. J.RammstedtB. (2012). Eine Kurzskala zur Messung von Kontrollüberzeugung: Die Skala Internale-Externale-Kontrollüberzeugung-4 (IE-4). (GESIS-Working Papers, 2012/19). Mannheim: GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften. (07 July, 2019). https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-312096
52.
KrausJ. M.ForsterY.HergethS.BaumannM. (2019). Two routes to trust calibration: Effects of reliability and brand information on trust in automation. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 11, 1–17.
53.
KrausJ.ScholzD.StiegemeierD.BaumannM. (2019). The more you know: Trust dynamics and calibration in highly automated driving and the effects of take-overs, system malfunction and system transparency. Human Factors. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819853686
54.
KrausJ.ScholzD.MessnerE. -M.MessnerM.BaumannM. (2020). Scared to trust? Predicting trust in highly automated driving by depressiveness, negative self-evaluations and state anxiety. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02917
55.
LarsenR. J.BussD. M. (2005). Personality psychology: Domains of knowledge about human nature. McGraw-Hill.
56.
LeeJ.MorayN. (1992). Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35, 1243–1270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139208967392
57.
LeeJ. D.MorayN. (1994). Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 153–184. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1994.1007
MadhavanP.PhillipsR. R. (2010). Effects of computer self-efficacy and system reliability on user interaction with decision support systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.005
64.
MadhavanP.WiegmannD. A. (2007). Similarities and differences between human–human and human–automation trust: An integrative review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8, 277–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220500337708
65.
MaxwellS. E.LauM. Y.HowardG. S. (2015). Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean?American Psychologist, 70, 487–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039400
66.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
McDonaldT.SiegallM. (1992). The effects of technological self-efficacy and job focus on job performance, attitudes, and withdrawal behaviors. The Journal of Psychology, 126, 465–475. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1992.10543380
MerrittS. M.Ako-BrewA.BryantW. J.StaleyA.McKennaM.LeoneA.ShiraseL. (2019). Automation-induced complacency potential: Development and validation of a new scale. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00225
71.
MerrittS. M.HeimbaughH.LaChapellJ.LeeD. (2013). I trust it, but I don’t know why: Effects of implicit attitudes toward automation on trust in an automated system. Human Factors, 55, 520–534.
72.
MerrittS. M.IlgenD. R. (2008). Not all trust is created equal: Dispositional and history-based trust in human-automation interactions. Human Factors, 50, 194–210. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288574
73.
MerrittS. M.UnnerstallJ. L.LeeD.HuberK. (2015). Measuring individual differences in the perfect automation schema. Human Factors, 57, 740–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815581247
74.
MorayN.InagakiT.ItohM. (2000). Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 44–58.
75.
MowenJ. C. (2000). The 3M model of motivation and personality: Theory and empirical applications to consumer behavior. Kluwer Academic Press.
76.
MowenJ. C.ParkS.ZablahA. (2007). Toward a theory of motivation and personality with application to word-of-mouth communications. Journal of Business Research, 60, 590–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.007
77.
MowenJ. C.VossK. E. (2008). On building better construct measures: Implications of a general hierarchical model. Psychology and Marketing, 25, 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20221
78.
MuirB. M. (1987). Trust between humans and machines, and the design of decision aids. International Journal of Man-MachineStudies, 27, 527–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(87)80013-5
79.
MuirB. M. (1994). Trust in automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 37, 1905–1922. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139408964957
80.
MuirB. M.MorayN. (1996). Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39, 429–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139608964474
81.
OehlerA.WedlichF. (2018). The relationship of extraversion and neuroticism with risk attitude, risk perception, and return expectations. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 11, 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/npe0000088
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, 943-aac4716.
84.
OwensT. J. (1993). Accentuate the positive and the negative: Rethinking the use of self-esteem, self-deprecation, and self-confidence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 56, 288–299. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786665
85.
ÖzkanT.LajunenT.KaistinenJ. (2005). Traffic locus of control, driving skills, and attitudes towards in-vehicle technologies (ISA & ACC). InProceedings of the 18th International Cooperation on Theories and Concepts in Traffic Safety (ICTCT).
86.
ParasuramanR.de VisserE.WieseE.MadhavanP. (2014). Human trust in other humans, automation, robots, and cognitive agents: Neural correlates and design implications. InProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol.58, pp.340–344). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581070
PayreW.CestacJ.DelhommeP. (2014). Intention to use a fully automated CAR: Attitudes and a priori acceptability. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 252–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.009
89.
PayreW.CestacJ.DelhommeP. (2016). Fully automated driving: Impact of trust and practice on manual control recovery. Human Factors, 58, 229–241.
90.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
91.
RajaonahB.AnceauxF.VienneF. (2006). Trust and the use of adaptive cruise control: A study of a cut-in situation. Cognition, Technology & Work, 8, 146–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-006-0030-3
92.
RammstedtB.JohnO. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
93.
RammstedtB.KemperC. J.KleinM. C.BeierleinC.KovalevaA. (2013). A short scale for assessing the Big Five dimensions of personality. Methoden, Daten, Analysen, 7, 233–249.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton.
96.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
97.
RotterJ. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976
RotterJ. B. (1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45, 489–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.4.489
101.
Rudin-BrownC. M.NoyY. I. (2002). Investigation of behavioral adaptation to lane departure warnings. Transportation Research Record, 1803, 30–37. https://doi.org/10.3141/1803-05
102.
SanchezJ.FiskA. D.RogersW. A. (2004). Reliability and age-related effects on trust and reliance of a decision support aid. InProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol.48, No.3, pp.586–589). Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120404800366
103.
SatorraA.BentlerE. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. InA.von EyeC. C.Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp.399–419). SAGE Publications.
104.
SaucierG. (1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment, 63, 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8
105.
SchaeferK. E.BillingsD. R.SzalmaJ. L.AdamsJ. K.SandersT. L.ChenJ. Y.HancockP. A. (2014). A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of trust in automation: Implications for human-robot interaction. Aberdeen.
106.
SchaeferK. E.ChenJ. Y. C.SzalmaJ. L.HancockP. A. (2016). A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of trust in automation: Implications for understanding autonomy in future systems. Human Factors, 58, 377–400.
107.
Schermelleh-EngelK.MoosbruggerH.MüllerH. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8, 23–74.
108.
SchneiderP. P.VogtC. A. (2012). Applying the 3M model of personality and motivation to adventure travelers. Journal of Travel Research, 51, 704–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287512451134
StarkweatherJ. (2012). Step out of the past: Stop using coefficient alpha; there are better ways to calculate reliability. Benchmarks RSS Matters.
111.
SteigerJ. H. (2016). Notes on the Steiger–Lind (1980) Handout. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23, 777–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705511.2016.1217487
112.
SteigerJ. H.LindJ. C. (1980). Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors. Handout for a presentation delivered at the meeting of the Psychometric Society. IA.
113.
SzalmaJ. L. (2008). Individual differences in stress reaction. InP. A.HancockJ. L.Szalma (Eds.), Performance under stress (pp.323–357). Ashgate.
114.
SzalmaJ. L. (2009). Individual differences in performance, workload, and stress in sustained attention: Optimism and pessimism. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 444–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.019
115.
SzalmaJ. L.TaylorG. S. (2011). Individual differences in response to automation: The five factor model of personality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 71–96.
116.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
117.
ThielmannI.HilbigB. E. (2015). Trust: An integrative review from a person–situation perspective. Review of General Psychology, 19(3), 249.
118.
UllmanJ. B. (2013). Structural equation modeling. InB. G.TabachnickL. S.Fidell (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics (pp.681–785). Pearson.
119.
WangL.JamiesonG. A.HollandsJ. G. (2009). Trust and reliance on an automated combat identification system. Human Factors, 51, 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720809338842
120.
WangL.JamiesonG. A.HollandsJ. G. (2011). The effects of design features on users’ trust in and reliance on a combat identification system. InProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol.1, pp.375–379). SAGE Publications.
121.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.96.3.465
122.
WestS. G.TaylorA. B.WuW. (2012). Model fit and model selection in structural equation modeling. InR. H.Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of structural equation modeling (pp.209–231). Guilford Press.
