How do Blame Attributions Impact Trust in Complex Task Environments?

Andrew Atchley, Emily O’Hear, Hannah M. Barr, Jenna E. Cotter, Bryanna Hamblin, Grace Oswald, Bryan Mesmer, Kristen Weger, Sampson Gholston, Vineetha Menon, Mustafa Demir, Nathan L. Tenhundfeld
{"title":"How do Blame Attributions Impact Trust in Complex Task Environments?","authors":"Andrew Atchley, Emily O’Hear, Hannah M. Barr, Jenna E. Cotter, Bryanna Hamblin, Grace Oswald, Bryan Mesmer, Kristen Weger, Sampson Gholston, Vineetha Menon, Mustafa Demir, Nathan L. Tenhundfeld","doi":"10.1177/21695067231192618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Trust in automation is a multidimensional process in predicting the proper use of automated systems. Trust can be generalized across components in multi-component systems, leading to contagion effects. However, no research has considered how blame attributions influence the size of contagion effects. We conducted an experiment to address how attributions of blame and responsibility influenced the magnitude of contagion effects for trust. Participants were presented with a hypothetical scenario depicting an airplane environment consisting of six human and six automation components. Participants rated their trust in each component before and after an oxygen mask failure. The findings indicate that the percentage of blame attributed to a component predicted the degree to that trust decreased following an error. Thus, more research should focus on how users assign blame across systems.","PeriodicalId":74544,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting","volume":"23 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21695067231192618","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Trust in automation is a multidimensional process in predicting the proper use of automated systems. Trust can be generalized across components in multi-component systems, leading to contagion effects. However, no research has considered how blame attributions influence the size of contagion effects. We conducted an experiment to address how attributions of blame and responsibility influenced the magnitude of contagion effects for trust. Participants were presented with a hypothetical scenario depicting an airplane environment consisting of six human and six automation components. Participants rated their trust in each component before and after an oxygen mask failure. The findings indicate that the percentage of blame attributed to a component predicted the degree to that trust decreased following an error. Thus, more research should focus on how users assign blame across systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
复杂任务环境下责备归因如何影响信任?
对自动化的信任是预测自动化系统正确使用的多维过程。在多组分系统中,信任可以在各组分之间泛化,从而产生传染效应。然而,没有研究考虑责备归因如何影响传染效应的大小。我们进行了一个实验,以解决归因的指责和责任如何影响传染效应的信任的大小。参与者被展示了一个假想的场景,描绘了一个由六个人和六个自动化组件组成的飞机环境。参与者在氧气面罩失效前后对每个组件的信任度进行了评分。研究结果表明,在错误发生后,归咎于某个组件的责任百分比预测了信任程度的下降。因此,更多的研究应该集中在用户如何跨系统分配责任上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Is vitamin A an antioxidant? Investigating Human Physiological Responses to Work-Related Stress Phishing in Social Media: Investigating Training Techniques on Instagram Shop Factor Analysis of a Generalized Video Game Experience Measure A Completion Rate Conundrum: Reducing bias in the Single Usability Metric
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1