Trust in smart systems: Sharing driving goals and giving information to increase trustworthiness and acceptability of smart systems in cars

Human Factors

Volumn 54, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 799-810

  Verberne, Frank M F ^a   Ham, Jaap ^a   Midden, Cees J H ^a  

^a EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

acceptance; adaptive cruise control systems; automation level; shared value similarity; social trust; system trust

Indexed keywords

ACCEPTANCE; AUTOMATION LEVELS; SHARED VALUES; SOCIAL TRUST; SYSTEM TRUST;

ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL; COMPUTER CONTROL;

AUTOMATION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; CAR; CAR DRIVING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MAN MACHINE INTERACTION; NETHERLANDS; PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT; TRUST;

ACCIDENTS, TRAFFIC; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; AUTOMOBILES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS; NETHERLANDS; PROTECTIVE DEVICES; TRUST;

EID: 84867360941     PISSN: 00187208     EISSN: 15478181     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0018720812443825     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Baron R. M., Kenny D. A.. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986 ; 51: 1173-1182
2. Bhattacharya R., Divinney T. M., Pillutla M. M.. A formal model of trust based on outcomes. Academy of Management Review. 1998 ; 23 (3). 459-472
3. Cvetkovich G., Siegrist M., Murray R., Tragesser S.. New information and social trust: Asymmetry and perseverance of attributions about hazard managers. Risk Analysis. 2002 ; 22: 359-367
4. De Vries P., Midden C., Meijnders A. L Trust in cooperative risk management: Uncertainty and scepticism in the public mind. Siegrist M. Earle T. C. Gutscher H., ed. London, UK: Earthscan ; 2007: 241-266.
5. Dzindolet M. T., Peterson S. A., Pomranky R., Pierce L. G., Beck H. P.. The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2003 ; 6: 697-718
6. Earle T. C., Siegrist M., Gutscher H. Trust in cooperative risk management: Uncertainty and scepticism in the public mind. Siegrist M. Earle T. C. Gutscher H., ed. London, UK: Earthscan ; 2007: 1-49.
7. Jian J., Bisantz A. M., Drury C. G.. Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics. 2000 ; 4: 53-71
8. Lee J. D., Moray N.. Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine system. Ergonomics. 1992 ; 35: 1243-1270
9. Lee J. D., See K. A.. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors. 2004 ; 46: 50-80
10. Lewandowsky S., Mundy M., Tan G.. The dynamics of trust: Comparing humans to automation. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied. 2000 ; 6: 104-123
11. MarkhofJ. (2010, October9). Google cars drive themselves, in traffic. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
12. Mayer R. C., Davis J. H., Schoorman F. D.. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review. 1995 ; 20: 709-734
13. Moray N., Inagaki T.. Laboratory studies of trust between humans and machines in automated systems. Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control. 1999 ; 21: 203-211
14. Muir B. M.. Trust in automation: 1. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics. 1994 ; 37: 1905-1922
15. Muir B. M., Moray N.. Trust in automation: 2. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics. 1996 ; 39: 429-460
16. Nass C., Fogg B. J., Moon Y.. Can computers be teammates?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 1996 ; 45: 669-678
17. Parasuraman R., Riley V.. Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors. 1997 ; 39: 230-253
18. Parasuraman R., Sheridan T. B., Wickens C. D.. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans. 2000 ; 30: 286-297
19. Poortinga W., Pidgeon N. F.. Prior attitudes, salient value similarity, and dimensionality: Toward an integrative model of trust and risk regulation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2006 ; 36: 1674-1700
20. Preacher K. J., Hayes A. F.. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods. 2008 ; 40 (2). 879-891
21. Reeves B., Nass C. The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press ; 1996 :
22. Riley V. Automation and human performance: Theory and applications. Parasuraman R. Mouloua M., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum ; 1996: 19-35.
23. Schuitema G., Steg L., Forward S.. Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2010 ; 44: 99-109
24. Sheridan T., Verplank W. Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Man-Machine Systems Laboratory ; 1978 :
25. Siegrist M., Cvetkovich G. T., Gutscher H.. Shared values, social trust, and the perception of geographic cancer clusters. Risk Analysis. 2001 ; 21: 1047-1053
26. Siegrist M., Cvetkovich G., Roth C.. Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis. 2000 ; 20: 353-362
27. Sobel M. E. Sociological methodology 1982. Leinhart S., ed. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association ; 1982: 290-312.
28. Tajfel H.. Experiments in intergroup discrimination. Scientific American. 1970 ; 223: 96-102
29. Tukey J. W. Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley ; 1977 :
30. Turner J. C., Brown R. J., Tajfel H.. Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favoritism. European Journal of Social Psychology. 1979 ; 9: 187-204
31. Van der Laan J. D., Heino A., De Waard D.. A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research. 1997 ; C5: 1-10
32. Vaske J. J., Abscher J. D., Bright A. D.. Salient value similarity, social trust and attitudes toward wildland fire management strategies. Human Ecology Review. 2007 ; 14: 223-232
33. Venkatesh V.. Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research. 2000 ; 11: 342-365