With the advancement of technology, automation has rapidly embedded itself in many parts of daily function. As a result, it is imperative to understand the processes in which individuals use and develop trust with automation. Specifically, how this relationship is formed and how it evolves over time. Previous research has theorized that the frequency and the positivity of interaction with automated systems is a prominent influencer in the creation of trust. In the present study, we examined subjective trust ratings when participants performed a pattern recognition task with an autonomous agent which varied in positivity and number of interactions. Results showed that positivity amongst other parameters were significant predictors of subjective trust when analyzed using linear mixed models.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
2.
BemelmansR.GelderblomG. J.JonkerP.de WitteL. (2012). Socially Assistive Robots in Elderly Care: A Systematic Review into Effects and Effectiveness. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 13(2), 114-120.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.Jamda.2010.10.002
3.
de VisserE. J.CohenM.FreedyA.ParasuramanR. (2014). A Design Methodology for Trust Cue Calibration in Cognitive Agents. In ShumakerR.LackeyS. (Eds.), Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments (Vol. 8525, pp. 251–262). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07458-0_24
4.
de VisserE. J.MonfortS. S.McKendrickR.SmithM. A. BMcKnightP. E.ParasuramanR. (2016). Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000092
5.
de VisserE. J.PeetersM. M. M.JungM. F.KohnS.ShawT. H.PakR.NeerincxM. A. (2020). Towards a Theory of Longitudinal Trust Calibration in Human–Robot Teams. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(2), 459–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00596-x
6.
DzindoletM. T.PetersonS. A.PomrankyR. A.PierceL. G.BeckH. P. (2003). The role of trust in automation reliance. Trust and Technology, 58(6), 697–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00038-7
7.
GobinR. L.FreydJ. J. (2014). The impact of betrayal trauma on the tendency to trust. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 6(5), 505–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032452
8.
HoffK. A.BashirM. (2015). Trust in Automation: Integrating Empirical Evidence on Factors That Influence Trust. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3), 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
9.
LeeJ. D.SeeK. A. (2004). Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance. Human Factors, 31.
10.
MadhavanP.WiegmannD. A. (2007). Similarities and differences between human–human and human–automation trust: An integrative review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8(4), 277–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220500337708
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: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55(3), 520–534. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812465081
R Core Team. (2020). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
15.
SheridanT. B. (2019). Individual Differences in Attributes of Trust in Automation: Measurement and Application to System Design. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1117. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01117
