Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Meta-Analytic Findings

Abstract

Objective

The present meta-analysis sought to determine significant factors that predict trust in artificial intelligence (AI). Such factors were divided into those relating to (a) the human trustor, (b) the AI trustee, and (c) the shared context of their interaction.

Background

There are many factors influencing trust in robots, automation, and technology in general, and there have been several meta-analytic attempts to understand the antecedents of trust in these areas. However, no targeted meta-analysis has been performed examining the antecedents of trust in AI.

Method

Data from 65 articles examined the three predicted categories, as well as the subcategories of human characteristics and abilities, AI performance and attributes, and contextual tasking. Lastly, four common uses for AI (i.e., chatbots, robots, automated vehicles, and nonembodied, plain algorithms) were examined as further potential moderating factors.

Results

Results showed that all of the examined categories were significant predictors of trust in AI as well as many individual antecedents such as AI reliability and anthropomorphism, among many others.

Conclusion

Overall, the results of this meta-analysis determined several factors that influence trust, including some that have no bearing on AI performance. Additionally, we highlight the areas where there is currently no empirical research.

Application

Findings from this analysis will allow designers to build systems that elicit higher or lower levels of trust, as they require.

Keywords

artificial intelligence trust human–automation interaction meta-analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chung

Iorga

Voas

Lee

. (2017). Alexa, can I trust you? Computer, 50, 100–104.doi:10.1109/MC.2017.3571053

29213147

Clark

. (2018). Integrity-based trust violations within human-machine teaming (Thesis). Naval Postgraduate School.

Cooper

Hedges

Valentine

J. C.

. (Eds.). (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.

Dorneich

M. C.

Dudley

Letsu-Dake

Rogers

Whitlow

S. D.

Dillard

M. C.

Nelson

. (2017). Interaction of automation visibility and information quality in flight deck information automation. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 47, 915–926.doi:10.1109/THMS.2017.2717939

Green

. (2018). Tesla: Autopilot was on during deadly Mountain View crash. The Mercury News. Palo Alto. Retrieved November 13, 2019, from https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/30/tesla-autopilot-was-on-during-deadly-mountain-view-crash/

Hancock

P. A.

Billings

D. R.

Schaefer

K. E

. (2011). Can you trust your robot? Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications, 19, 24–29.doi:10.1177/1064804611415045

Hancock

P. A.

Billings

D. R.

Schaefer

K. E.

Chen

J. Y. C.

de Visser

E. J.

Parasuraman

. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53, 517–527.doi:10.1177/0018720811417254

22046724

Hancock

P. A.

Kessler

T. T.

Kaplan

A. D.

Brill

J. C.

Szalma

J. L

. (2020). Evolving trust in robots: Specification through sequential and comparative meta-analyses. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 18720820922080.doi:10.1177/0018720820922080

32519902

Hancock

P. A.

Nourbakhsh

Stewart

. (2019). On the future of transportation in an era of automated and autonomous vehicles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 7684–7691.doi:10.1073/pnas.1805770115

10.

Haring

K. S.

Matsumoto

Watanabe

. (2013). How do people perceive and trust a lifelike robot. In Proceedings of the world Congress on engineering and computer science (Vol. 1, ISSN: 2078-096). Newswood Limited.

11.

Hoff

K. A.

Bashir

. (2015). Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57, 407–434.doi:10.1177/0018720814547570

25875432

12.

Horwitz

Timmons

. (2016). The scary similarities between Tesla’s (TSLA) deadly autopilot crashes. Quartz. Atlantic Media. Retrieved November 13, 2019, from https://qz.com/783009/the-scary-similarities-between-teslas-tsla-deadly-autopilot-crashes/

13.

Hunter

J. E.

Schmidt

F. L

. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage Publications Inc.

14.

Kaplan

A. D.

Sanders

Hancock

P. A

. (2018). The relationship between extroversion and the tendency to Anthropomorphize robots: A Bayesian analysis. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 5, 135–145.doi:10.3389/frobt.2018.00135

33501013

15.

Lubben

. (2018). Self-driving Uber killed a pedestrian as human safety driver watched. Vice News. Vice Media. Retrieved November 13, 2019. https://www.vice.com/en/article/kzxq3y/self-driving-uber-killed-a-pedestrian-as-human-safety-driver-watched

16.

Lyons

J. B.

Stokes

C. K.

Eschleman

K. J.

Alarcon

G. M.

Barelka

A. J

. (2011). Trustworthiness and IT suspicion: An evaluation of the nomological network. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53, 219–229.doi:10.1177/0018720811406726

21830509

17.

McCarthy

Minsky

M. L.

Rochester

Shannon

C. E

. (1955). A proposal for the Dartmouth summer research project on artificial intelligence. AI Magazine, 27, 2–12.

18.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

Altman

D. G

PRISMA Group . (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 264–269.doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135

19622511

19.

Moray

Inagaki

Itoh

. (2000). Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 44–58.doi:10.1037/1076-898X.6.1.44

10937311

20.

Morris

D. M.

Erno

J. M.

Pilcher

J. J

. (2017). September). Electrodermal response and automation trust during simulated self-driving car use. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting. (Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 1759–1762). SAGE Publications.

21.

Ohlheiser

. (2016). Trolls turned Tay, Microsoft’s fun millennial AI bot, into a genocidal maniac. Washington Post. Retrieved on June 24, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/03/24/the-internet-turned-tay-microsofts-fun-millennial-ai-bot-into-a-genocidal-maniac/

22.

Poole

Goebel

R. G.

Mackworth

A. K

. (1998). Computational intelligence. Oxford University Press.

23.

Schaefer

K. E.

Chen

J. Y. C.

Szalma

J. L.

Hancock

P. 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.doi:10.1177/0018720816634228

27005902

24.

Sethumadhavan

. (2019). Trust in artificial intelligence. Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications, 27, 34–34.doi:10.1177/1064804618818592

25.

Sheridan

T. B

. (2019). Individual differences in attributes of trust in automation: Measurement and application to system design. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1117.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01117

31178783

26.

Suciu

. (2019). Data algorithms are being used on social media to track COVID-19’s impact. Forbes. Retrieved March 19, 2020, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/petersuciu/2020/03/12/data-algorithms-are-being-used-on-social-media-to-track-covid-19s-impact/#20bc4d0c68a9

27.

Tolmeijer

Weiss

Hanheide

Lindner

Powers

T. M.

Dixon

Tielman

M. L

. (2020). Taxonomy of trust-relevant failures and mitigation strategies. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 3–12). Association for Computing Machinery.doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/3319502.3374793.

28.

Wang

M. E

. (2018). “We have to trust it, or else we can just throw it away”: The use of decision support systems during extreme weather event (Master’s thesis). University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.