Visible to the public In Automation We Trust? Identifying Varying Levels of Trust in Human and Automated Information SourcesConflict Detection Enabled

TitleIn Automation We Trust? Identifying Varying Levels of Trust in Human and Automated Information Sources
Publication TypeConference Proceedings
Year of Publication2016
AuthorsPearson, C. J., Welk, A. K., Mayhorn, C. B.
Conference NameHuman Factors and Ergonomics Society
Pagination201-205
PublisherHuman Factors and Ergonomics Society
Conference LocationWashington DC
KeywordsWarning of Phishing Attacks, Supporting Human Information Processing, Identifying Phishin Deception Indicators, and Reducing Vulnerability
Abstract

Humans can easily find themselves in high cost situations where they must choose between suggestions made by an automated decision aid and a conflicting human decision aid. Previous research indicates that trust is an antecedent to reliance, and often influences how individuals prioritize and integrate information presented from a human and/or automated information source. Expanding on previous work conducted by Lyons and Stokes (2012), the current experiment measured how trust in automated or human decision aids differs along with perceived risk and workload. The simulated task required 126 participants to choose the safest route for a military convoy; they were presented with conflicting information regarding which route was safest from an automated tool and a human. Results demonstrated that as workload increased, trust in automation decreased. As the perceived risk increased, trust in the human decision aid increased. Individual differences in dispositional trust correlated with an increased trust in both decision aids. These findings can be used to inform training programs and systems for operators who may receive information from human and automated sources. Examples of this context include: air traffic control, aviation, and signals intelligence.

Citation Keynode-29000

Other available formats:

Pearson_et_al_2016.pdf
AttachmentSize
bytes