You can view the full text of this article for free using the link below.

Title: Attitudinal predictors of relative reliance on human vs. automated advisors

Authors: Stephanie M. Merritt; Ruchi Sinha; Paul G. Curran; Daniel R. Ilgen

Addresses: Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri – St. Louis, 421 Stadler Hall, St. Louis, MO 63121, USA ' Indian School of Business, Academic Centre, # 8117, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, AP 500032, India ' Michigan State University, 178 Giltner Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA ' Department of Psychology, Psychology Building, 316 Physics-Room 340A, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Abstract: Trust and liking are attitudes with important implications for automation reliance in single-advisor settings; however, the extent to which their relationships with reliance generalise to settings in which the user receives conflicting advice from a human and automation is unknown. Participants completed an X-ray screening task and received simultaneous advice from what they believed was another human and an automated aid. High disuse was found for both advisors. Among participants who relied on advice, those with greater relative liking for the automation than for the human significantly increased their reliance on the automation relative to the human during the first half of the task. No significant relationships were found between relative trust or relative liking with reliance in the later part of the task, suggesting that reliance processes in dual-advisor settings may differ from those in single-advisor settings.

Keywords: trust; liking; X-ray screening; automation reliance; attitudes; conflicting advice; decision making; dual advisor settings; vigilance; attitudinal predictors; human advisors; automated advisors.

DOI: 10.1504/IJHFE.2015.072982

International Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2015 Vol.3 No.3/4, pp.327 - 345

Available online: 10 Nov 2015 *

Full-text access for editors Access for subscribers Free access Comment on this article