Systematic Review of the Use and Modification of the “Trust in Automated Systems Scale”

Subjective trust in automation measurement is used prolifically due to its high availability and practical ease in implementation, and remains close to the state-of-the-art. Yet, it is also easy to violate a validated survey measure by altering components of the measure, such as changing wording, altering the number of items, changing the scale of response, and translating into new languages. An exhaustive review of the Jian et al. scale’s trust in automated systems measure as it was used across 1,480 cited works. More than half altered the scale in ways which, on average, lowered the scale’s internal validity. Increasing the number of modifications further reduced internal validity. Guidance for the future use of subjective scales in trust measurement is provided. We retain hope of encouraging adherence to best practices and enabling continued use of subjective trust measurement in human-centered AI system development efforts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
Published
2025-07-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10711813251357911
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
14.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Systematic Review of the Use and Modification of the “Trust in Automated Systems Scale”

Robert S. Gutzwiller, Rezvan Yousefi, Jessica Lee, Nathan Tenhundfeld et al.
6 citations
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
14.63
article

Systematic Review of the Use and Modification of the “Trust in Automated Systems Scale”

Robert S. Gutzwiller, Rezvan Yousefi, Jessica Lee, Nathan Tenhundfeld, Apoorva Verma, Tia Larson-Calcano, Iman Maknojia
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Subjective trust in automation measurement is used prolifically due to its high availability and practical ease in implementation, and remains close to the state-of-the-art. Yet, it is also easy to violate a validated survey measure by altering components of the measure, such as changing wording, altering the number of items, changing the scale of response, and translating into new languages. An exhaustive review of the Jian et al. scale’s trust in automated systems measure as it was used across 1,480 cited works. More than half altered the scale in ways which, on average, lowered the scale’s internal validity. Increasing the number of modifications further reduced internal validity. Guidance for the future use of subjective scales in trust measurement is provided. We retain hope of encouraging adherence to best practices and enabling continued use of subjective trust measurement in human-centered AI system development efforts.

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingVol. 69(1)
Lux Research (United States) (US), Arizona State University (US), University of Maryland, College Park (US), University of Alabama in Huntsville (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
14.63
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.