Trust models and theories in human–computer interaction: A systematic literature review

IF 4.9 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Computers in human behavior reports Pub Date : 2024-09-29 DOI:10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100495
Siddharth Gulati , Joe McDonagh , Sonia Sousa , David Lamas
{"title":"Trust models and theories in human–computer interaction: A systematic literature review","authors":"Siddharth Gulati ,&nbsp;Joe McDonagh ,&nbsp;Sonia Sousa ,&nbsp;David Lamas","doi":"10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Trust in human–computer interaction (HCI) has been studied from multiple angles using a variety of theoretical frameworks. However, there is no comprehensive overview of these frameworks in the literature. We conducted a systematic literature review of 47 studies to establish a body of knowledge on trust frameworks in HCI. We found that 22 studies used theories from diverse fields such as psychology, economics, and communication to study trust formation and development. Our review highlights the challenge of capturing the dynamic nature of trust in HCI, given the complex interplay of multiple underlying factors. We also identify significant gaps in the current body of literature, highlighting the scarcity of standardized, empirically validated instruments for trust measurement. To address these issues, we propose avenues for future research, both theoretical and empirical. Furthermore, we emphasize the imperative of advancing new methods to capture better the multi-dimensional nature of trust. Our review contributes to broadening the discourse on trust in HCI, stimulating further inquiry and offering valuable insights for future research and practice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72681,"journal":{"name":"Computers in human behavior reports","volume":"16 ","pages":"Article 100495"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in human behavior reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958824001283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Trust in human–computer interaction (HCI) has been studied from multiple angles using a variety of theoretical frameworks. However, there is no comprehensive overview of these frameworks in the literature. We conducted a systematic literature review of 47 studies to establish a body of knowledge on trust frameworks in HCI. We found that 22 studies used theories from diverse fields such as psychology, economics, and communication to study trust formation and development. Our review highlights the challenge of capturing the dynamic nature of trust in HCI, given the complex interplay of multiple underlying factors. We also identify significant gaps in the current body of literature, highlighting the scarcity of standardized, empirically validated instruments for trust measurement. To address these issues, we propose avenues for future research, both theoretical and empirical. Furthermore, we emphasize the imperative of advancing new methods to capture better the multi-dimensional nature of trust. Our review contributes to broadening the discourse on trust in HCI, stimulating further inquiry and offering valuable insights for future research and practice.
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
人机交互中的信任模型和理论:系统文献综述
人们利用各种理论框架从多个角度研究了人机交互(HCI)中的信任问题。然而,文献中并没有对这些框架进行全面概述。我们对 47 项研究进行了系统的文献综述,以建立人机交互信任框架的知识体系。我们发现,有 22 项研究使用了心理学、经济学和传播学等不同领域的理论来研究信任的形成和发展。鉴于多种基本因素的复杂相互作用,我们的综述强调了捕捉人机交互中信任的动态性质所面临的挑战。我们还发现了当前文献中存在的重大空白,强调了缺乏标准化的、经过经验验证的信任测量工具。为了解决这些问题,我们提出了未来研究的途径,包括理论研究和实证研究。此外,我们强调必须推进新的方法,以更好地捕捉信任的多维性。我们的综述有助于拓宽人机交互中有关信任的讨论,激发进一步的探索,并为未来的研究和实践提供有价值的见解。
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
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The impact of social media reports on nurses’ job satisfaction: A cross-section suvery I Don't matter anyway. Will more Instagram change that? Anti-mattering and Instagram Feed vs. stories addiction symptoms: The moderating roles of loneliness and life satisfaction Surprising gender biases in GPT IT really matters: Associations of computer hassles and technical support with medically certified sickness absence due to mental health complaints Effect of business intelligence on organizational competitiveness- exploring the mediation of technology anxiety
×
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