Watch For Failing Objects: What Inappropriate Compliance Reveals About Shared Mental Models In Autonomous Cars

Abstract

This paper evaluates Banks et al.’s Human-AI Shared Mental Model theory by examining how a self-driving vehicle’s hazard assessment facilitates shared mental models. Participants were asked to affirm the vehicle’s assessment of road objects as either hazards or mistakes in real-time as behavioral and subjective measures were collected. The baseline performance of the AI was purposefully low (<50%) to examine how the human’s shared mental model might lead to inappropriate compliance. Results indicated that while the participant true positive rate was high, overall performance was reduced by the large false positive rate, indicating that participants were indeed being influenced by the Al’s faulty assessments, despite full transparency as to the ground-truth. Both performance and compliance were directly affected by frustration, mental, and even physical demands. Dispositional factors such as faith in other people’s cooperativeness and in technology companies were also significant. Thus, our findings strongly supported the theory that shared mental models play a measurable role in performance and compliance, in a complex interplay with trust.