Reliability of autonomous agents has been shown to play a pivotal role in the human-agent team. This research investigates the relationship between demographic factors and trust using the application environment, Space Navigator. Using stepwise multiple linear regression, it was found that workload (NASA-TLX), gender, education level, and the reliability of the autonomous agent impact the perceived reliability or user trust in the system. When the user experienced higher workload, the user placed less trust in the autonomous agent. Females trusted the agent less and more educated users trusted the autonomous agent more. Finally, more reliable agents led to higher levels of trust in the agent by human users.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BindewaldJ. M.MillerM. E.PetersonG. L. (2014). A function-to-task process model for adaptive automation system design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 72(12), 822–834.
2.
BuchanN. R.CrosonR. T. A.SolnickS. (2008). Trust and gender: An examination of behavior and beliefs in the Investment Game. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68(3–4), 466–476.
3.
de VisserE. J.ParasuramanR. (2011). Adaptive Aiding of Human-RobotTeaming: Effects of Imperfect Automation on Performance, Trust, and Workload. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5(2), 209–231.
4.
DixonS. R.WickensC. D. (2006). Automation reliability in unmanned aerial vehicle control: a reliance-compliance model of automation dependence in high workload. Human Factors, 48(3), 474–486.
5.
DixonS. R.WickensC. D.MccarleyJ. S. (2007). On The Independence of Compliance and Reliance: Are Automation False Alarms Worse Than Misses?, Human Factors, 49(4), 564–572.
6.
DzindoletM. T.PetersonS. A.PomrankyR. A.PierceL. G.BeckH. P. (2003). The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(6), 697–718.
7.
EndsleyM. R. (2015). Autonomous Horizons: System Autonomy in the Air Force - A Path to the Future, vol.1: Human-Autonomy Teaming.
8.
HaselhuhnM. P.KennedyJ. A.KrayL. J.Van ZantA. B.SchweitzerM. E. (2015). Gender differences in trust dynamics: Women trust more than men following a trust violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 56, 104–109.
9.
HoG.KiffL. M.PlocherT.HaighK. Z. (2005). A Model of trust and reliance of automation technology for older users. AAAI-2005 Fall Symposium:“Caring Machines: AI in Eldercare.
10.
HoffK. A.BashirM. (2015). Trust in Automation: Integrating Empirical Evidence on Factors That Influence Trust . Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 57(3), 407–434.
11.
KleinG.WoodsD. D.BradshawJ. M.HoffmanR. R.FeltovichP. J. (2004). Ten challenges for making automation a “team player” in joint human-agent activity. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 19(6), 91–95.
12.
McCarleyJ. S.WiegmannD. A.WickensC. D.Kramera. F. (2003). Effects of Age on Utilization and Perceived Reliability of an Automated Decision-Making aid for Luggage Screening. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 47(3), 340–343.
13.
ParasuramanR.ManzeyD. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration. Human Factors, 52(3), 381–410.
14.
ParasuramanR.RileyV. (1997). Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230-253.
15.
RossJ. M.SzalmaJ. L.HancockP. a.BarnettJ. S.TaylorG. (2008). The Effect of Automation Reliability on User Automation Trust and Reliance in a Search-and-Rescue Scenario. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 52(19), 1340–1344.
16.
RussellS.J.NorvigP. (2010). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Pearson: Boston, 3rd Edition.
17.
SheridanT. B. (1984). Supervisory contol of remote manipulators, vehicles and dynamic process: Experiments in command and display aiding, In RouseWB (Ed.), Advances in Man-Machine Systems Research, Vol. I, 49–137.
18.
WickensC. D.DixonS. R. (2007). The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: a synthesis of the literature. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8(3), 201-212.
