Comfort or Promise? Investigating the Effect of Trust Repair Strategies of Intelligent Vehicle System on Trust and Intention to Use from a Perspective of Social Cognition

Feng, Yushun; Tan, Hao

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-06053-3_11

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although our findings are p reliminary, they highlight that promises may be an effective approach to restoring trust in UGVs through repairing perceptions of trustworthiness. This finding is novel and especially important as other repair strategies have been shown to be primarily ineffective (Esterwood & Robert, 2022;Feng & Tan, 2022;Xu & Howard, 2022). Second, this paper offers contributions to theory by identifying the role of benevolence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Currently, there are only a handful of studies that have investigated the efficacy of trust repair strategies in the con-text of UGVs (Feng & Tan, 2022;Kohn et al, 2019Kohn et al, , 2018Xu & Howard, 2022). Generally, these studies have produced mixed and leaning towards non-significant results.…”

Section: Trust Repairs In Ugvsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generally, these studies have produced mixed and leaning towards non-significant results. In particular, three studies found that apologies and denials were ineffective in restoring trust (Feng & Tan, 2022; Kohn et al, 2018; Xu & Howard, 2022), two studies found that explanations were i nef- fective (Feng & Tan, 2022; Kohn et al, 2018), and one study found that combining explanations with promises was ineffec- tive (Feng & Tan, 2022). Conversely, however, one additional study found that both apologies and denials were effective in restoring trust in UGVs (Kohn et al, 2019).…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This limits our understanding of what and when repairs may be effective in the context of UGVs. (Feng & Tan, 2022; Kohn, Momen, Wiese, Lee, & Shaw, 2019; Kohn, Quinn, Pak, De Visser, & Shaw, 2018; Xu & Howard, 2022). This limits our understanding of what and when repairs may be effective in the context of UGVs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, the efficacy of repair strategies has generally shown mixed results (Esterwood & Robert, 2022). This is especially the case in the context of UGVs (Feng & Tan, 2022;Kohn, Momen, Wiese, Lee, & Shaw, 2019;Kohn, Quinn, Pak, De Visser, & Shaw, 2018;Xu & Howard, 2022). This limits our understanding of what and when repairs may be effective in the context of UGVs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Promises and Trust Repair in UGVs

Esterwood,

Ali,

George

et al. 2023

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) are autonomous robots capable of performing tasks through self- navigation and decision-making. They have the potential to replace humans in dangerous driving scenarios. However, UGVs must be viewed as trustworthy to be accepted, and like any automation, they can make mistakes that decrease human trust in them. Trust repair strategies can mitigate the consequences of trust violations, but they are not always effective. To better understand their effectiveness on UGVs, we designed a between-subjects study examining promises on a UGV’s trustworthiness. Preliminary results showed that promises had a marginal impact on overall trustworthiness but were influential in repairing benevolence but not ability or integrity. These findings have implications for the design of UGV’s and trust repair theory.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%