Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 331-349

  de Visser, Ewart J ^a,b   Monfort, Samuel S ^a,b   McKendrick, Ryan ^a   Smith, Melissa A B ^a   McKnight, Patrick E ^a   Krueger, Frank ^a   Parasuraman, Raja ^a  

^a GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Perceptronics Solutions Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Artificial intelligence; Automation design; Humanness; Media equation; Virtual agents

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; COGNITION; COMPUTER; COMPUTER INTERFACE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; TRUST; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; AUTOMATION; COGNITION; COMPUTERS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; TRUST; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84986260158     PISSN: 1076898X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xap0000092     Document Type: Article

References (134)

1. Akgun, M., Cagiltay, K., & Zeyrek, D. (2010). The effect of apologetic error messages and mood states on computer users' self-appraisal of performance. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2430-2448. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.011
2. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390-412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
3. Bahner, J., Huper, A., & Manzey, D. (2008). Misuse of automated decision aids: Complacency, automation bias and the impact of training experience. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 688-699. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.06.001
4. Bailey, N., & Scerbo, M. (2007). Automation-induced complacency for monitoring highly reliable systems: The role of task complexity, system experience, and operator trust. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8, 321-348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14639220500535301
5. Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
6. Bartneck, C. (2008). The Godspeed Questionnaire Series. Retrieved from http://www.bartneck.de/2008/03/11/the-godspeed-questionnaire-series/.
7. Bartneck, C., Kulić, D., Croft, E., & Zoghbi, S. (2009). Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1, 71-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0001-3
8. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes (R package version 0.999999-0). Vienna, Austria: R Foundation.
9. Beller, J., Heesen, M., & Vollrath, M. (2013). Improving the driver-automation interaction: An approach using automation uncertainty. Human Factors, 55, 1130-1141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720813482327
10. Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A., Swinth, K., Hoyt, C., & Bailenson, J. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 103-124. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1302_01
11. Bonaccio, S., & Dalal, R. (2006). Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 127-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.07.001
12. Boudreau, C., McCubbins, M. D., & Coulson, S. (2009). Knowing when to trust others: An ERP study of decision making after receiving information from unknown people. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4, 23-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsn034
13. Bradfield, M. (1999). The effects of blame attributions and offender likableness on forgiveness and revenge in the workplace. Journal of Management, 25, 607-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500501
14. Brainbridge, W., Hart, J., Kim, E., & Scassellati, B. (2011). The benefits of interactions with physically present robots over video-displayed agents. International Journal of Social Robotics, 3, 41-52. http://doi.org/10. 1007/s12369-010-0082-7
15. Breazeal, C. (2002). Designing sociable robots. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
16. Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1987). Application of hierarchical linear models to assessing change. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 147-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.1.147
17. Cassell, J., & Bickmore, T. (2003). Negotiated collusion: Modeling social language and its relationship effects in intelligent agents. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 13, 89-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A: 1024026532471
18. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
19. Cohen, M., Parasuraman, R., & Freeman, J. (1998). Trust in decision aids: A model and its training implications. In Proceedings of the 1998 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (pp. 1-37). Monterey, CA: International Command and Control Institute. Retrieved from (http://www.dodccrp-test.org/about-the-institute/)
20. Croson, R., Boles, T., & Murnighan, J. (2003). Cheap talk in bargaining experiments: Lying and threats in ultimatum games. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 51, 143-159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-2681(02)00092-6
21. Culley, K., & Madhavan, P. (2013). A note of caution regarding anthropomorphism in HCI agents. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 577-579. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.023
22. Delgado, M. R., Frank, R. H., & Phelps, E. A. (2005). Perceptions of moral character modulate the neural systems of reward during the trust game. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1611-1618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nn1575
23. de Melo, C., Gratch, J., & Carnevale, P. (2014). Humans vs. Computers: Impact of emotion expressions on people's decision making. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 6, 127-136. Retrieved from http:// ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6853335
24. de Visser, E. J., Cohen, M., Freedy, A., & Parasuraman, R. (2014). A Design Methodology for Trust Cue Calibration in Cognitive Agents. In R. Shumaker & S. Lackey (Eds.), Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 8525, pp. 251-262). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07458-0_24
25. de Visser, E. J., Krueger, F., McKnight, P., Scheid, S., Smith, M., Chalk, S., & Parasuraman, R. (2012). The world is not enough: Trust in cognitive agents. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56, 263-267. http://doi.org/10.1177/ 1071181312561062
26. de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2011). Adaptive aiding of humanrobot teaming: Effects of imperfect automation on performance, trust, and workload. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5, 209-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1555343411410160
27. de Vries, P., Midden, C., & Bouwhuis, D. (2003). The effects of errors on system trust, self-confidence, and the allocation of control in route planning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 719-735. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00039-9
28. Dijkstra, J. (1999). User agreement with incorrect expert system advice. Behaviour & Information Technology, 18, 399-411. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/014492999118832
29. Dijkstra, J., Liebrand, W., & Timminga, E. (1998). Persuasiveness of expert systems. Behaviour & Information Technology, 17, 155-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/014492998119526
30. Dirks, K. T., Kim, P., Ferrin, D. L., & Cooper, C. D. (2011). Understanding the effects of substantive responses on trust following a transgression. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 114, 87-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.10.003
31. DiSalvo, C., & Gemperle, F. (2002). All robots are not created equal: The design and perception of humanoid robot heads. In DIS '02 Proceedings of the 4th conference on Designing interactive systems: Processes, practices, methods, and techniques (pp. 321-326). New York, NY: ACM.
32. Dixon, S. R., Wickens, C. D., & McCarley, J. S. (2007). On the independence of compliance and reliance: Are automation false alarms worse than misses? Human Factors, 49, 564-572. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/ 001872007X215656
33. Dzindolet, M., Peterson, S., Pomranky, R., Pierce, L. G., & Beck, H. P. (2003). The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 697-718. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S1071-5819(03)00038-7
34. Farrell, J., & Rabin, M. (1996). Cheap talk. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 103-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.10.3.103
35. Fink, J. (2012). Anthropomorphism and human likeness in the design of robots and human-robot interaction. In International Conference on Social Robotics (pp. 199-208). Chendu, China: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34103-8_20
36. Fox, J., Ahn, S. J., Janssen, J. H., Yeykelis, L., Segovia, K. Y., & Bailenson, J. N. (2014). Avatars versus agents: A meta-analysis quantifying the effect of agency on social influence. Human-Computer Interaction, 30, 37-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2014.921494
37. Garland, A. (Director). (2015). Ex machina [Motion picture]. United States: Universal Studios.
38. Gentilviso, C. (2010). The 50 worst inventions: Clippy. Time. Retrieved from. http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/ 0,28804,1991915_1991909_1991755,00.html
39. Gillespie, N., & Dietz, G. (2009). Trust repair after an organization-level failure. Academy of Management Review, 34, 127-145. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5465/AMR.2009.35713319
40. Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315, 619. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1134475
41. Hancock, P.A.(2014).Automation:Howmuchis too much? Ergonomics, 57, 449-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.816375
42. Hancock, P. A., Billings, D. R., Schaefer, K. E., Chen, J. Y., de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2011). A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Human Factors, 53, 517-527. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720811417254
43. Hayes, C., & Miller, C. A. (2011). Human-computer etiquette: Cultural expectations and the design implications they place on computers and technology. Boca Raton, Florida: Auerbach Publications.
44. Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. The American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1416950
45. Helldin, T., Falkman, G., Riveiro, M., & Davidsson, S. (2013). Presenting system uncertainty in automotive UIs for supporting trust calibration in autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications - AutomotiveUI (pp. 210-217). New York, NY: ACM. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1145/2516540.2516554
46. Hoff, K. A., & Bashir, M. (2015). Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human Factors, 57, 407-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720814547570
47. Honda. (2012). Asimo heads to Germany for AMI 2012. Retrieved from http://asimo.honda.com/
48. Hutchinson, K. (2014, December 5). Hatsune Miku: Japan's holographic pop star might be the future of music. The Guardian, p. 1. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/dec/05/hatsune-mikujapan- hologram-pop-star
49. Jonze, S. (Director). (2013). Her [Motion picture]. United Sates: Warner brothers.
50. Kim, P., Dirks, K., Cooper, C., & Ferrin, D. (2006). When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal vs. external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence- vs. integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 49-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.07.002
51. Kim, P. H., Ferrin, D. L., Cooper, C. D., & Dirks, K. T. (2004). Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence- versus integrity-based trust violations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 104-118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.1.104
52. King-Casas, B., Tomlin, D., Anen, C., Camerer, C. F., Quartz, S. R., & Montague, P. R. (2005). Getting to know you: Reputation and trust in a two-person economic exchange. Science, 308, 78-83. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1126/science.1108062
53. Krach, S., Hegel, F., Wrede, B., Sagerer, G., Binkofski, F., & Kircher, T. (2008). Can machines think? Interaction and perspective taking with robots investigated via fMRI. PLoS ONE, 3, e2597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002597
54. Krueger, F., McCabe, K., Moll, J., Kriegeskorte, N., Zahn, R., Strenziok, M., Grafman, J. (2007). Neural correlates of trust. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104, 20084-20089.
55. Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. New York, NY: The Viking Press.
56. Laird, N. M., & Ware, J. H. (1982). Random-effects models for longitudinal data. Biometrics, 38, 963-974. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2529876
57. Lee, J., & Moray, N. (1992). Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35, 1243-1270. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139208967392
58. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46, 50-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392
59. Lewandowsky, S., Mundy, M., & Tan, G. P. A. (2000). The dynamics of trust: Comparing humans to automation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 104-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.6.2.104
60. Lewicki, R., & Wiethoff, C. (2000). Trust, trust development, and trust repair. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory Into Practice, 1, 86-107.
61. Lucas, G. M., Gratch, J., King, A., & Morency, L. P. (2014). It's only a computer: Virtual humans increase willingness to disclose. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 94-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.043
62. MacDorman, K. F., & Ishiguro, H. (2006). The uncanny advantage of using androids in cognitive and social science research. Interaction Studies: Social Behaviour and Communication in Biological and Artificial Systems, 7, 297-337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/is.7.3.03mac
63. Madhavan, P., & Wiegmann, D. A. (2007a). Effects of information source, pedigree, and reliability on operator interaction with decision support systems. Human Factors, 49, 773-785. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/ 001872007X230154
64. Madhavan, P., & Wiegmann, D. (2007b). Similarities and differences between human-human and human-automation trust: An integrative review. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8, 277-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14639220500337708
65. Madhavan, P., Wiegmann, D. A., & Lacson, F. C. (2006). Automation failures on tasks easily performed by operators undermine trust in automated aids. Human Factors, 48, 241-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/ 001872006777724408
66. Manzey, D., Reichenbach, J., & Onnasch, L. (2012). Human performance consequences of automated decision aids: The impact of degree of automation and system experience. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 6, 57-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1555343411433844
67. Mayer, R., Davis, J., & Schoorman, F. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
68. McBride, S. E., Rogers, W. A., & Fisk, A. D. (2014). Understanding human management of automation errors. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 15, 545-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2013.817625
69. McCullough, M. E., Worthington, E. L., Jr., & Rachal, K. C. (1997). Interpersonal forgiving in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 321-336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.2.321
70. McGuirl, J. M., & Sarter, N. B. (2006). Supporting trust calibration and the effective use of decision aids by presenting dynamic system confidence information. Human Factors, 48, 656-665. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/ 001872006779166334
71. Meadows, M. (2010). We, robot: Skywalker's hand, Blade Runners, Iron Man, Slutbots, and how fiction became fact. Lyon, France: Lyons Press.
72. Melendez, S. (2015, February 10). Tinder bots have evolved to mimic the girl next door. Motherboard. Retrieved from http://motherboard.vice. com/read/tinder-bots-next-door
73. Merritt, S. M. (2011). Affective processes in human-automation interactions. Human Factors, 53, 356-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0018720811411912
74. Merritt, S., Heimbaugh, H., LaChapell, J., & Lee, D. (2013). I trust it, but i don't know why: Effects of implicit attitudes toward automation on trust in an automated system. Human Factors, 55, 520-534.
75. Merritt, S. M., & Ilgen, D. R. (2008). Not all trust is created equal: Dispositional and history-based trust in human-automation interactions. Human Factors, 50, 194-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288574
76. Merritt, S. M., Lee, D., Unnerstall, J. L., & Huber, K. (2015). Are well-calibrated users effective users? Associations between calibration of trust and performance on an automation-aided task. Human Factors, 57, 34-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720814561675
77. Molloy, R., & Parasuraman, R. (1996). Monitoring an automated system for a single failure: Vigilance and task complexity effects. Human Factors, 38, 311-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/001872096779048093
78. Monfort, S. S., Kaczmarek, L. D., Kashdan, T. B., Drazkowski, D., Kosakowski, M., Guzik, P., Gracanin, A. (2014). Capitalizing on the success of romantic partners: A laboratory investigation on subjective, facial, and physiological emotional processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 68, 149-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.028
79. Mori, M. (1970). The uncanny valley. Energy, 7, 33-35.
80. Muir, B. (1987). Trust between humans and machines, and the design of decision aids. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 27, 527-539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7373(87)80013-5
81. Muir, B. (1994). Trust in automation: Part I. Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems. Ergonomics, 37, 1905-1922. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139408964957
82. Muir, B. M., & Moray, N. (1996). Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. Ergonomics, 39, 429 - 460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00140139608964474
83. Muralidharan, L., de Visser, E. J., & Parasuraman, R. (2014). The effects of pitch contour and flanging on trust in speaking cognitive agents. In Proceedings of the extended abstracts of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems-CHI EA '14 (pp. 2167-2172). New York, NY: ACM Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2581231
84. Nakayachi, K., & Watabe, M. (2005). Restoring trustworthiness after adverse events: The signaling effects of voluntary "hostage posting" on trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.02.001
85. Nass, C., & Lee, K. M. (2001). Does computer-synthesized speech manifest personality? Experimental tests of recognition, similarity-attraction, and consistency-attraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 171-181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.171
86. Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 81-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153
87. Nass, C., Moon, Y., Fogg, B., Reeves, B., & Dryer, D. C. (1995). Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43, 223-239. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1995.1042
88. Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. (1994). Computers are social actors. In CHI '94 Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 73-78). Boston, MA: ACM.
89. Newcomb, D. (2014, December 5). Making robot cars more human. PC Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/article2/ 0,2817,2473149,00.asp
90. Ohlheiser, A. (2015, June 30). Ask Siri "what is zero divided by zero?" and she will send you to the burn ward. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/30/ ask-siri-what-is-zero-divided-by-zero-and-she-will-send-you-to-theburn- ward/
91. Pak, R., Fink, N., Price, M., Bass, B., & Sturre, L. (2012). Decision support aids with anthropomorphic characteristics influence trust and performance in younger and older adults. Ergonomics, 55, 1059-1072. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2012.691554
92. Pak, R., McLaughlin, A. C., & Bass, B. (2014). A multi-level analysis of the effects of age and gender stereotypes on trust in anthropomorphic technology by younger and older adults. Ergonomics, 57, 1277-1289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.928750
93. Parasuraman, R. (2003). Neuroergonomics: Research and practice. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 4, 5-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 14639220210199753
94. Parasuraman, R. (2011). Neuroergonomics: Brain, cognition, and performance at work. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 181-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721411409176
95. Parasuraman, R., Cosenzo, K. A., & de Visser, E. J. (2009). Adaptive automation for human supervision of multiple uninhabited vehicles: Effects on change detection, situation awareness, and mental workload. Military Psychology, 21, 270-297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08995600902768800
96. Parasuraman, R., & Manzey, D. H. (2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors, 52, 381-410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720810376055
97. Parasuraman, R., & Miller, C. A. (2004). Trust and etiquette in highcriticality automated systems. Communications of the ACM, 47, 51-55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/975817.975844
98. Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R., & Singh, I. (1993). Performance consequences of automation-induced "complacency." The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0301_1
99. Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230-253. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1518/001872097778543886
100. Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T.,& Wickens, C. (2008). Situation awareness, mental workload, and trust in automation: Viable, empirically supported cognitive engineering constructs. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2, 140-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/155534308X284417
101. Pinheiro, J. C., & Bates, D. M. (2000). Linear mixed-effects models: Basic concepts and examples. In J. C. Pinheiro & D. M. Bates (Eds.). Mixedeffects models in S and S-PLUS (pp. 3-56). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Science & Business Media.
102. Qiu, L., & Benbasat, I. (2010). A study of demographic embodiments of product recommendation agents in electronic commerce. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68, 669-688. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2010.05.005
103. R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
104. Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
105. Rempel, J., Holmes, J., & Zanna, M. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 95-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95
106. Rice, S., & McCarley, J. S. (2011). Effects of response bias and judgment framing on operator use of an automated aid in a target detection task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 320-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024243
107. Riva, P., Sacchi, S., Brambilla, M., Riva, P., Sacchi, S., & Brambilla, M. (2015). Humanizing machines: Anthropomorphization of slot machines increases gambling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21, 313-325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xap0000057
108. Rotter, J. (1971). Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American Psychologist, 26, 443-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0031464
109. Rotter, J. (1980). Interpersonal trust, trustworthiness, and gullibility. American Psychologist, 35, 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.1.1
110. Rovira, E., McGarry, K., & Parasuraman, R. (2007). Effects of imperfect automation on decision making in a simulated command and control task. Human Factors, 49, 76 - 87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1518/ 001872007779598082
111. Sanchez, J., Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., & Rovira, E. (2014). Understanding reliance on automation: Effects of error type, error distribution, age and experience. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 15, 134-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2011.611269
112. Satterthwaite, F. E. (1946). An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bulletin, 2, 110-114. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2307/3002019
113. Schilke, O., Reimann, M., & Cook, K. S. (2013). Effect of relationship experience on trust recovery following a breach. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 15236-15241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1314857110
114. Schweitzer, M., Hershey, J., & Bradlow, E. (2006). Promises and lies: Restoring violated trust. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 1-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.05.005
115. Singh, I., Molloy, R., & Parasuraman, R. (1993). Automation-induced "complacency": Development of the complacency-potential rating scale. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 111-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0302_2
116. Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13, 675-682. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1993.tb01329.x
117. Slovic, P. (1999). Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis: An Official Publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 19, 689-701. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10765431
118. Thielmann, I., & Hilbig, B. E. (2015). Trust: An integrative review from a person-situation perspective. Review of General Psychology, 19, 249-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000046
119. Thompson, J. C., Trafton, J. G., & McKnight, P. (2011). The perception of humanness from the movements of synthetic agents. Perception, 40, 695-704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/p6900
120. Tomlinson, E., Dineen, B. R., & Lewicki, R. J. (2004). The road to reconciliation: Antecedents of victim willingness to reconcile following a broken promise. Journal of Management, 30, 165-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2003.01.003
121. Tomlinson, E., & Mayer, R. (2009). The role of causal attribution dimensions in trust repair. Academy of Management Review, 34, 85-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2009.35713291
122. Traum, D., Rickel, J., Gratch, J., & Marsella, S. (2003). Negotiation over tasks in hybrid human-agent teams for simulation-based training. In Proceedings of the second international joint conference on Autonomous agents and multiagent systems (pp. 441-448). Melbourne,Victoria, Australia: ACM.
123. Turing, A. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59, 433-460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433
124. Tzeng, J.-Y. (2004). Toward a more civilized design: Studying the effects of computers that apologize. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61, 319-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2004.01.002
125. van den Brule, R., Dotsch, R., Bijlstra, G., Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Haselager, P. (2014). Do robot performance and behavioral style affect human trust? International Journal of Social Robotics, 6, 519-531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0231-5
126. van Dongen, K., & van Maanen, P.-P. (2013). A framework for explaining reliance on decision aids. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 71, 410-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2012.10.018
127. Verberne, F. M., Ham, J., & Midden, C. J. H. (2012). Trust in smart systems: Sharing driving goals and giving information to increase trustworthiness and acceptability of smart systems in cars. Human Factors, 54, 799-810. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720812443825
128. Verberne, F. M., Ham, J., & Midden, C. J. H. (2015). Trusting a virtual driver that looks, acts, and thinks like you. Human Factors, 57, 895-909. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018720815580749
129. Verberne, F., Ham, J., Ponnada, A., & Midden, C. (2013). Trusting digital chameleons: The effect of mimicry by a virtual social agent on user trust. In International Conference on Persuasive Technology (pp. 234-245). Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Springer.
130. Walter, S., Wendt, C., Böhnke, J., Crawcour, S., Tan, J.-W., Chan, A., Traue, H. C. (2014). Similarities and differences of emotions in humanmachine and human-human interactions: What kind of emotions are relevant for future companion systems? Ergonomics, 57, 374-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.822566
131. Waytz, A., Heafner, J., & Epley, N. (2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 113-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.01.005
132. Wells, G. L., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus sampling and social psychological experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1115-1125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672992512005
133. Wiener, E. L. (1988). Cockpit automation. In E. L. Wiener & D. C. Nagel (Eds.), Human factors in aviation (pp. 433-461). San Francisco, CA: Academic Press.
134. Wiese, E., Wykowska, A., Zwickel, J., & Müller, H. J. (2012). I see what you mean: How attentional selection is shaped by ascribing intentions to others. PLoS ONE, 7, e45391. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045391