Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The trust placed in automated diagnostic aids by the human operator is one of the most critical psychological factors that influences operator reliance on decision support systems. Studies examining the nature of human interaction with automation have revealed that users have a propensity to apply norms of human-human interpersonal interaction to their interaction with ‘intelligent machines’. Nevertheless, there exist subtle differences in the manner in which humans perceive and react to automated aids compared to human teammates. The present review is focused on comparing the process of trust development in human-automation teams with that of human-human partnerships, specifically in the context of dyads that constitute a primary decision maker and either a human ‘advisor’ or an intelligent automated decision support system. A conceptual framework that synthesizes and contrasts the process of trust development in humans versus automation is proposed. Potential implications of this research include the improved design of decision support systems by incorporating features into automated aids that elicit operator responses that mirror responses in human-human interpersonal interaction.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Blomqvist

(1997). The many faces of trust. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13 (3), 271–286.

Bowers

C. A.

Oser

R. A.

Salas

Cannon-Bowers

J. A.

(1996). Team performance in automated systems. In Parasuraman

Mouloua

(Eds.), Automation and Human performance: Theory and Applications. (pp. 243–263). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dzindolet

M. T.

Pierce

L. G.

Beck

H. P.

Dawe

L. A.

(2002). The perceived utility of human and automated aids in a visual detection task. Human Factors, 44, 79–94.

Dijkstra

J. J.

(1999). User agreement with incorrect expert system advice. Behaviour and Information Technology, 18(6), 399–411.

Jian

J. Y.

Bisantz

A. M.

Drury

C. G.

(2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53–71.

Lee

J. D.

See

K. A.

(2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46 (1), 50–80.

Lerch

F. J.

Prietula

M. J.

Kulik

C. T.

(1997). The Turing effect: The nature of trust in expert system advice. In Feltovich

P. J.

Ford

K. M.

(Eds.), Expertise in Context: Human and Machine. (pp. 417–448). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Lewandowsky

Mundy

Tan

G. P. A.

(2000). The dynamics of trust: Comparing humans to automation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 104–123.

Madhavan

Wiegmann

D. A.

Lacson

F. C.

(2003). Automation failures on tasks easily performed by operators undermines trust in automated aids. Proceedings of the 47th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Santa Monica: CA.

10.

Nass

C. L.

Fogg

B. J.

Moon

(1996). Can computers be teammates?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 669–678.

11.

Nass

C. L.

Moon

(2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (1), 81–103.

12.

Reeves

Nass

(1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and the new media like real people and places. Center for the Study of Language and Information, Cambridge University Press, Stanford, CA.

13.

Winograd

Flores

(1987). Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design. (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley).

A New Look at the Dynamics of Human-Automation Trust: Is Trust in Humans Comparable to Trust in Machines?

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References