Trust in AI: supportive vs. autonomous roles across four domains

Abstract Trust in artificial intelligence (AI) remains a central concern as autonomous systems become increasingly embedded in everyday life. This study investigates how users evaluate AI in two distinct roles—supportive decision aid vs. autonomous decision maker—across four societal domains: healthcare, finance, workplace decision-making, and education. Across all domains, participants reported substantially higher comfort with supportive AI, revealing a robust trust asymmetry in affective trust-related responses. We further examined whether individual differences, including personality traits, value orientations, demographics, and prior AI experience, predicted trust in either AI role. Experience with AI and openness-to-change emerged as meaningful predictors of trust in autonomous AI, suggesting that familiarity and value-driven dispositions shape acceptance of more independent systems. These findings underscore the importance of psychological mechanisms, such as exposure and value alignment, in shaping trust in AI and offer implications for the design of human-centered, trustworthy AI systems.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI & Society
Published
2026-04-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-026-03040-7
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Trust in AI: supportive vs. autonomous roles across four domains

Maria Larsson, Robin Lindström Kupiainen, Gunne Grankvist
AI & Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Trust in AI: supportive vs. autonomous roles across four domains

Maria Larsson, Robin Lindström Kupiainen, Gunne Grankvist
article en

Abstract

Abstract Trust in artificial intelligence (AI) remains a central concern as autonomous systems become increasingly embedded in everyday life. This study investigates how users evaluate AI in two distinct roles—supportive decision aid vs. autonomous decision maker—across four societal domains: healthcare, finance, workplace decision-making, and education. Across all domains, participants reported substantially higher comfort with supportive AI, revealing a robust trust asymmetry in affective trust-related responses. We further examined whether individual differences, including personality traits, value orientations, demographics, and prior AI experience, predicted trust in either AI role. Experience with AI and openness-to-change emerged as meaningful predictors of trust in autonomous AI, suggesting that familiarity and value-driven dispositions shape acceptance of more independent systems. These findings underscore the importance of psychological mechanisms, such as exposure and value alignment, in shaping trust in AI and offer implications for the design of human-centered, trustworthy AI systems.

AI & Society
University West (SE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.

Trust in AI: supportive vs. autonomous roles across four domains — Maria Larsson, Robin Lindström Kupiainen, et al. · AI & Society (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS