Affiliation:
1. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin – Madison, WI, USA
2. Charles River Analytics, Cambridge, MA, USA
Abstract
When people experience the same automation, their trust in automation can diverge. Prior research has used individual differences—trust propensity and complacency—to explain this divergence. We argue that bifurcation as an outcome of a dynamic system better explains trust divergence. Linear mixed-effect models were used to identify features to predict trust (i.e., individual differences, automation reliability, and exposure). Individual differences associated with trust propensity and complacency increases the R2 of the baseline model by 0.01, from R2 = 0.40 to 0.41. Furthermore, the Best Linear Unbiased Predictors (BLUPS) for random effect of participants were uncorrelated with trust propensity and complacency. In contrast, modeling trust divergence from a dynamic perspective, which considers the interaction between reliability and exposure along with the individual by-reliability variability fit the data well ( R2 = 0.84). These results suggest dynamic interaction with automation produce trust divergence and design should focus on state dependence and responsivity.
Subject
General Medicine,General Chemistry
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献