In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI

Abstract If artificial intelligence (AI) is to help solve individual, societal and global problems, humans should neither underestimate nor overestimate its trustworthiness. Situated in-between these two extremes is an ideal ‘Goldilocks’ zone of credibility. But what will keep trust in this zone? We...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Kevin Allan, Nir Oren, Jacqui Hutchison, Douglas Martin
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/8b690a2115c34615bbf54f43afd6666b
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:8b690a2115c34615bbf54f43afd6666b
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:8b690a2115c34615bbf54f43afd6666b2021-12-02T18:18:51ZIn search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI10.1038/s41598-021-93109-82045-2322https://doaj.org/article/8b690a2115c34615bbf54f43afd6666b2021-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-93109-8https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract If artificial intelligence (AI) is to help solve individual, societal and global problems, humans should neither underestimate nor overestimate its trustworthiness. Situated in-between these two extremes is an ideal ‘Goldilocks’ zone of credibility. But what will keep trust in this zone? We hypothesise that this role ultimately falls to the social cognition mechanisms which adaptively regulate conformity between humans. This novel hypothesis predicts that human-like functional biases in conformity should occur during interactions with AI. We examined multiple tests of this prediction using a collaborative remembering paradigm, where participants viewed household scenes for 30 s vs. 2 min, then saw 2-alternative forced-choice decisions about scene content originating either from AI- or human-sources. We manipulated the credibility of different sources (Experiment 1) and, from a single source, the estimated-likelihood (Experiment 2) and objective accuracy (Experiment 3) of specific decisions. As predicted, each manipulation produced functional biases for AI-sources mirroring those found for human-sources. Participants conformed more to higher credibility sources, and higher-likelihood or more objectively accurate decisions, becoming increasingly sensitive to source accuracy when their own capability was reduced. These findings support the hypothesised role of social cognition in regulating AI’s influence, raising important implications and new directions for research on human–AI interaction.Kevin AllanNir OrenJacqui HutchisonDouglas MartinNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-13 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Kevin Allan Nir Oren Jacqui Hutchison Douglas Martin In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
description	Abstract If artificial intelligence (AI) is to help solve individual, societal and global problems, humans should neither underestimate nor overestimate its trustworthiness. Situated in-between these two extremes is an ideal ‘Goldilocks’ zone of credibility. But what will keep trust in this zone? We hypothesise that this role ultimately falls to the social cognition mechanisms which adaptively regulate conformity between humans. This novel hypothesis predicts that human-like functional biases in conformity should occur during interactions with AI. We examined multiple tests of this prediction using a collaborative remembering paradigm, where participants viewed household scenes for 30 s vs. 2 min, then saw 2-alternative forced-choice decisions about scene content originating either from AI- or human-sources. We manipulated the credibility of different sources (Experiment 1) and, from a single source, the estimated-likelihood (Experiment 2) and objective accuracy (Experiment 3) of specific decisions. As predicted, each manipulation produced functional biases for AI-sources mirroring those found for human-sources. Participants conformed more to higher credibility sources, and higher-likelihood or more objectively accurate decisions, becoming increasingly sensitive to source accuracy when their own capability was reduced. These findings support the hypothesised role of social cognition in regulating AI’s influence, raising important implications and new directions for research on human–AI interaction.
format	article
author	Kevin Allan Nir Oren Jacqui Hutchison Douglas Martin
author_facet	Kevin Allan Nir Oren Jacqui Hutchison Douglas Martin
author_sort	Kevin Allan
title	In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
title_short	In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
title_full	In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
title_fullStr	In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
title_full_unstemmed	In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI
title_sort	in search of a goldilocks zone for credible ai
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/8b690a2115c34615bbf54f43afd6666b
work_keys_str_mv	AT kevinallan insearchofagoldilockszoneforcredibleai AT niroren insearchofagoldilockszoneforcredibleai AT jacquihutchison insearchofagoldilockszoneforcredibleai AT douglasmartin insearchofagoldilockszoneforcredibleai
_version_	1718378167689805824

In search of a Goldilocks zone for credible AI

Ejemplares similares