Social identity in trusting artificial intelligence agents: Evidence from lab and online experiments

Abstract This paper explores human trust in artificial intelligence (AI), focusing on the effects of social categorization (ingroup vs. outgroup) and AI human‐likeness through two pre‐registered studies involving 160 participants each. The first study, a lab experiment in China, and the second, an online experiment representative of the United States, both utilized a trust game to assess trust across four conditions: ingroup‐humanoid AI, ingroup‐non‐humanoid AI, outgroup‐humanoid AI, and outgroup‐non‐humanoid AI. Results indicated higher trust for ingroup and humanoid AIs, with statistical significance. Mixed‐design ANOVA was used to analyze the data, revealing significant main effects and interactions. The second study also identified an emotional connection as a mediator in trust, suggesting significant design implications for AI in trust‐critical sectors like healthcare and autonomous transportation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Managerial and Decision Economics
Published
2024-08-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.4361
Citations
15
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.98

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Social identity in trusting artificial intelligence agents: Evidence from lab and online experiments

Yanqi Sun, Cheng Xu, Hao Xu
15 citations
Managerial and Decision Economics
Misinformation and Its Impacts
16.98
article

Social identity in trusting artificial intelligence agents: Evidence from lab and online experiments

Yanqi Sun, Cheng Xu, Hao Xu
article en
15 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper explores human trust in artificial intelligence (AI), focusing on the effects of social categorization (ingroup vs. outgroup) and AI human‐likeness through two pre‐registered studies involving 160 participants each. The first study, a lab experiment in China, and the second, an online experiment representative of the United States, both utilized a trust game to assess trust across four conditions: ingroup‐humanoid AI, ingroup‐non‐humanoid AI, outgroup‐humanoid AI, and outgroup‐non‐humanoid AI. Results indicated higher trust for ingroup and humanoid AIs, with statistical significance. Mixed‐design ANOVA was used to analyze the data, revealing significant main effects and interactions. The second study also identified an emotional connection as a mediator in trust, suggesting significant design implications for AI in trust‐critical sectors like healthcare and autonomous transportation.

Managerial and Decision EconomicsVol. 45(8)
Beijing Institute of Petrochemical Technology (CN), Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (CN), Washington State University (US)
Beijing Municipal Social Science Foundation
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
16.98
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.