Abstract
Assessment of human-machine trust is difficult because of confounds in context, system capability and reliability. Trust indicates willingness to be vulnerable to the variable and unpredicted actions of another actor. Making people vulnerable to risk from decisions made by an intelligent agent is difficult to justify for research ethics purposes. Making expensive, physical intelligent agents vulnerable to human decisions is an inhibiting factor to exploring the development of trust or teams with embodied systems. These confounds can be addressed through use of virtual reality and immersive gaming systems. This chapter describes the development of two platforms, PAR-TNER and PARTI, for the exploration of human collaboration with autonomous systems, and provides an overview of a limited initial pilot of PAR-TNER. In PAR-TNER and PAR-TI, the test participant teams with either humans or machines to escape from a room collaboratively. PAR-TNER leverages virtual reality to stimulate risk, while PAR-TI allows researchers to explore team dynamics. While the data from the pilot test of PAR-TNER are limited, they indicate the ability to leverage the research platforms to discern trust from perceived capability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bailey, N., Scerbo, M.: The impact of operator trust on monitoring a highly reliable automated system. In: Proceedings of HCI International 2005, Las Vegas, 22-27 July 2005 (2005)
Benbasat, I., Wang, W.: Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 6(3), 4 (2005)
Cooke, N.J., Gorman, J.C., Myers, C.W., Duren, J.L.: Interactive team cognition. Cogn. Sci. 37(2), 255–285 (2013)
de Visser, E., Parasuraman, R.: Adaptive aiding of human-robot teaming: effects of imperfect automation on performance, trust, and workload. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Making 5(2), 209–231 (2011)
Desai, M., Kaniarasu, P., Medvedev, M., Steinfeld, A., Yanco, H.: Impact of robot failures and feedback on real-time trust. In: 2013 8th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 251–258. IEEE, March 2013
Desai, M., et al.: Effects of changing reliability on trust of robot systems. In: 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pp. 73–80. IEEE, March 2012
Deutsch, M.: The effect of motivational orientation upon trust and suspicion. Hum. Relat. 13, 123–139 (1960)
Gorman, J.C., Cooke, N.J., Winner, J.L.: Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments. In: Situational Awareness, pp. 183–196. Routledge (2017)
Gorman, J.C., Cooke, N.J., Winner, J.L.: Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments. Ergonomics 49(12–13), 1312–1325 (2006)
Hancock, P.A., Billings, D.R., Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y., De Visser, E.J., Parasuraman, R.: A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human-robot interaction. Hum. Factors 53(5), 517–527 (2011)
Hoff, K.A., Bashir, M.: Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Hum. Factors 57(3), 407–434 (2015)
Jackson, K.F., Prasov, Z., Vincent, E.C., Jones, E.M.: A heuristic based framework for improving design of unmanned systems by quantifying and assessing operator trust. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 1696–1700. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, September 2016
Khalid, H.M., et al.: Exploring psycho-physiological correlates to trust: implications for human-robot-human interaction. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 697–701. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, September 2016
Koller, M.: Risk as a determinant of trust. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 9(4), 265–276 (1988)
Kosfeld, M., Heinrichs, M., Zak, P.J., Fischbacher, U., Fehr, E.: Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature 435(7042), 673–676 (2005)
Lee, J.D., See, K.A.: Trust in automation: designing for appropriate reliance. Hum. Factors 46(1), 50–80 (2004)
Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20, 709–734 (1995)
Molm, L.D., Takahashi, N., Peterson, G.: Risk and trust in social exchange: an experimental test of a classical proposition. Am. J. Sociol. 105(5), 1396–1427 (2000)
Muir, B.M.: Trust between humans and machines, and the design of decision aids. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 27(5–6), 527–539 (1987)
Perkins, L., Miller, J.E., Hashemi, A., Burns, G.: Designing for human-centered systems: situational risk as a factor of trust in automation. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 54, no. 25, pp. 2130–2134. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, September 2010
Portal Perpetual Testing Initiative: Valve Corporation. Registered trademark (2011). https://www.thinkwithportals.com/
Ross, J.M., Szalma, J.L., Hancock, P.A., Barnett, J.S., Taylor, G.: The effect of automation reliability on user automation trust and reliance in a search-and-rescue scenario. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 52, no. 19, pp. 1340–1344. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, September 2008
Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S., Camerer, C.: Not so different after all: a cross-discipline view of trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23(3), 393–404 (1998)
Salas, E., Dickinson, T., Converse, S., Tannenbaum, S.: Toward an understanding of team performance and training. In: Sweezey, R., Salas, E. (eds.) Teams: Theirtraining and Performance. Ablex, Norwood (1992)
Schaefer, K.E., Chen, J.Y., Szalma, J.L., Hancock, P.A.: A meta-analysis of factors influencing the development of trust in automation: implications for understanding autonomy in future systems. Hum. Factors 58(3), 377–400 (2016)
Seong, Y., Bisantz, A.M.: The impact of cognitive feedback on judgment performance and trust with decision aids. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 38(7–8), 608–625 (2008)
Sifakis, J.: Can we trust autonomous systems? Boundaries and risks. In: Chen, Y.-F., Cheng, C.-H., Esparza, J. (eds.) ATVA 2019. LNCS, vol. 11781, pp. 65–78. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31784-3_4
Waytz, A., Heafner, J., Epley, N.: The mind in the machine: anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 52, 113–117 (2014)
Xu, H., Teo, H.H., Tan, B.: Predicting the adoption of location-based services: the role of trust and perceived privacy risk. In: ICIS 2005 Proceedings, vol. 71 (2005)
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Joshua Baker for his exceptional assistance with statistical analyses.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marble, J.L. et al. (2021). Platforms for Assessing Relationships: Trust with Near Ecologically-Valid Risk, and Team Interaction. In: Lawless, W.F., Llinas, J., Sofge, D.A., Mittu, R. (eds) Engineering Artificially Intelligent Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13000. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89385-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89385-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-89384-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-89385-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)