In human–machine trust, humans rely on a simple averaging strategy

With the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in our lives, attention is increasingly turning to the way that humans and AI work together. A key aspect of human-AI collaboration is how people integrate judgements or recommendations from machine agents, when they differ from their own judgements. We investigated trust in human-machine teaming using a perceptual judgement task based on the judge-advisor system. Participants ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>89</mml:mn></mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) estimated a perceptual quantity, then received a recommendation from a machine agent. The participants then made a second response which combined their first estimate and the machine's recommendation. The degree to which participants shifted their second response in the direction of the recommendations provided a measure of their trust in the machine agent. We analysed the role of advice distance in people's willingness to change their judgements. When a recommendation falls a long way from their initial judgement, do people come to doubt their own judgement, trusting the recommendation more, or do they doubt the machine agent, trusting the recommendation less? We found that although some participants exhibited these behaviours, the most common response was neither of these tendencies, and a simple model based on averaging accounted best for participants' trust behaviour. We discuss implications for theories of trust, and human-machine teaming.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cognitive Research Principles and Implications
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00583-5
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.29

Funders

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

In human–machine trust, humans rely on a simple averaging strategy

Jonathon Love, Scott Brown, Ami Eidels, Quentin F. Gronau et al.
2 citations
Cognitive Research Principles and Implications
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
1.29
article

In human–machine trust, humans rely on a simple averaging strategy

Jonathon Love, Scott Brown, Ami Eidels, Quentin F. Gronau, G.S. Palmer
article en
2 citations

Abstract

With the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in our lives, attention is increasingly turning to the way that humans and AI work together. A key aspect of human-AI collaboration is how people integrate judgements or recommendations from machine agents, when they differ from their own judgements. We investigated trust in human-machine teaming using a perceptual judgement task based on the judge-advisor system. Participants ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mn>89</mml:mn></mml:mrow> </mml:math> ) estimated a perceptual quantity, then received a recommendation from a machine agent. The participants then made a second response which combined their first estimate and the machine's recommendation. The degree to which participants shifted their second response in the direction of the recommendations provided a measure of their trust in the machine agent. We analysed the role of advice distance in people's willingness to change their judgements. When a recommendation falls a long way from their initial judgement, do people come to doubt their own judgement, trusting the recommendation more, or do they doubt the machine agent, trusting the recommendation less? We found that although some participants exhibited these behaviours, the most common response was neither of these tendencies, and a simple model based on averaging accounted best for participants' trust behaviour. We discuss implications for theories of trust, and human-machine teaming.

Cognitive Research Principles and ImplicationsVol. 9(1)
University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Australian Government, Australian Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
1.29
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.