探索人-人工智能团队中道德与信任的关系:一种混合方法

IF 2.2 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making Pub Date : 2022-08-02 DOI:10.1177/15553434221113964
Claire Textor, Rui Zhang, Jeremy Lopez, Beau G. Schelble, Nathan J. Mcneese, Guo Freeman, R. Pak, Chad C. Tossell, E. D. de Visser
{"title":"探索人-人工智能团队中道德与信任的关系:一种混合方法","authors":"Claire Textor, Rui Zhang, Jeremy Lopez, Beau G. Schelble, Nathan J. Mcneese, Guo Freeman, R. Pak, Chad C. Tossell, E. D. de Visser","doi":"10.1177/15553434221113964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advancements and implementations of autonomous systems coincide with an increased concern for the ethical implications resulting from their use. This is increasingly relevant as autonomy fulfills teammate roles in contexts that demand ethical considerations. As AI teammates (ATs) enter these roles, research is needed to explore how an AT’s ethics influences human trust. This current research presents two studies which explore how an AT’s ethical or unethical behavior impacts trust in that teammate. In Study 1, participants responded to scenarios of an AT recommending actions which violated or abided by a set of ethical principles. The results suggest that ethicality perceptions and trust are influenced by ethical violations, but only ethicality depends on the type of ethical violation. Participants in Study 2 completed a focus group interview after performing a team task with a simulated AT that committed ethical violations and attempted to repair trust (apology or denial). The focus group responses suggest that ethical violations worsened perceptions of the AT and decreased trust, but it could still be trusted to perform tasks. The AT’s apologies and denials did not repair damaged trust. The studies’ findings suggest a nuanced relationship between trust and ethics and a need for further investigation into trust repair strategies following ethical violations.","PeriodicalId":46342,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","volume":"16 1","pages":"252 - 281"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring the Relationship Between Ethics and Trust in Human–Artificial Intelligence Teaming: A Mixed Methods Approach\",\"authors\":\"Claire Textor, Rui Zhang, Jeremy Lopez, Beau G. Schelble, Nathan J. Mcneese, Guo Freeman, R. Pak, Chad C. Tossell, E. D. de Visser\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15553434221113964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Advancements and implementations of autonomous systems coincide with an increased concern for the ethical implications resulting from their use. This is increasingly relevant as autonomy fulfills teammate roles in contexts that demand ethical considerations. As AI teammates (ATs) enter these roles, research is needed to explore how an AT’s ethics influences human trust. This current research presents two studies which explore how an AT’s ethical or unethical behavior impacts trust in that teammate. In Study 1, participants responded to scenarios of an AT recommending actions which violated or abided by a set of ethical principles. The results suggest that ethicality perceptions and trust are influenced by ethical violations, but only ethicality depends on the type of ethical violation. Participants in Study 2 completed a focus group interview after performing a team task with a simulated AT that committed ethical violations and attempted to repair trust (apology or denial). The focus group responses suggest that ethical violations worsened perceptions of the AT and decreased trust, but it could still be trusted to perform tasks. The AT’s apologies and denials did not repair damaged trust. The studies’ findings suggest a nuanced relationship between trust and ethics and a need for further investigation into trust repair strategies following ethical violations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"252 - 281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434221113964\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434221113964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

自主系统的进步和实现与人们对其使用所产生的伦理影响的日益关注相吻合。随着自主性在需要道德考虑的环境中发挥队友的作用,这一点变得越来越重要。随着人工智能队友(AT)进入这些角色,需要研究AT的道德如何影响人类的信任。目前的这项研究提出了两项研究,探讨AT的道德或不道德行为如何影响对队友的信任。在研究1中,参与者对AT建议违反或遵守一系列道德原则的行为的情景做出了反应。研究结果表明,道德认知和信任受到道德违规的影响,但只有道德行为取决于道德违规的类型。研究2的参与者在与一名违反道德并试图修复信任(道歉或否认)的模拟AT执行团队任务后,完成了焦点小组访谈。焦点小组的回应表明,违反道德行为恶化了对AT的认知,降低了信任,但它仍然可以被信任执行任务。AT的道歉和否认并没有修复受损的信任。研究结果表明,信任和道德之间存在微妙的关系,需要对违反道德行为后的信任修复策略进行进一步调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Exploring the Relationship Between Ethics and Trust in Human–Artificial Intelligence Teaming: A Mixed Methods Approach
Advancements and implementations of autonomous systems coincide with an increased concern for the ethical implications resulting from their use. This is increasingly relevant as autonomy fulfills teammate roles in contexts that demand ethical considerations. As AI teammates (ATs) enter these roles, research is needed to explore how an AT’s ethics influences human trust. This current research presents two studies which explore how an AT’s ethical or unethical behavior impacts trust in that teammate. In Study 1, participants responded to scenarios of an AT recommending actions which violated or abided by a set of ethical principles. The results suggest that ethicality perceptions and trust are influenced by ethical violations, but only ethicality depends on the type of ethical violation. Participants in Study 2 completed a focus group interview after performing a team task with a simulated AT that committed ethical violations and attempted to repair trust (apology or denial). The focus group responses suggest that ethical violations worsened perceptions of the AT and decreased trust, but it could still be trusted to perform tasks. The AT’s apologies and denials did not repair damaged trust. The studies’ findings suggest a nuanced relationship between trust and ethics and a need for further investigation into trust repair strategies following ethical violations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Is the Pull-Down Effect Overstated? An Examination of Trust Propagation Among Fighter Pilots in a High-Fidelity Simulation A Taxonomy for AI Hazard Analysis Understanding Automation Failure Integrating Function Allocation and Operational Event Sequence Diagrams to Support Human-Robot Coordination: Case Study of a Robotic Date Thinning System Adapting Cognitive Task Analysis Methods for Use in a Large Sample Simulation Study of High-Risk Healthcare Events.
×
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