Designing for Responsible Trust in AI Systems: A Communication Perspective
arXiv:2204.13828 · doi:10.1145/3531146.3533182
Abstract
Current literature and public discourse on "trust in AI" are often focused on the principles underlying trustworthy AI, with insufficient attention paid to how people develop trust. Given that AI systems differ in their level of trustworthiness, two open questions come to the fore: how should AI trustworthiness be responsibly communicated to ensure appropriate and equitable trust judgments by different users, and how can we protect users from deceptive attempts to earn their trust? We draw from communication theories and literature on trust in technologies to develop a conceptual model called MATCH, which describes how trustworthiness is communicated in AI systems through trustworthiness cues and how those cues are processed by people to make trust judgments. Besides AI-generated content, we highlight transparency and interaction as AI systems' affordances that present a wide range of trustworthiness cues to users. By bringing to light the variety of users' cognitive processes to make trust judgments and their potential limitations, we urge technology creators to make conscious decisions in choosing reliable trustworthiness cues for target users and, as an industry, to regulate this space and prevent malicious use. Towards these goals, we define the concepts of warranted trustworthiness cues and expensive trustworthiness cues, and propose a checklist of requirements to help technology creators identify appropriate cues to use. We present a hypothetical use case to illustrate how practitioners can use MATCH to design AI systems responsibly, and discuss future directions for research and industry efforts aimed at promoting responsible trust in AI.
arXiv commentFAccT 2022 paper draft
References in corpus (4)
Cited by in corpus (20)
- Homogenization Effects of Large Language Models on Human Creative Ideation
- ChainForge: A Visual Toolkit for Prompt Engineering and LLM Hypothesis Testing
- Investigating and Designing for Trust in AI-powered Code Generation Tools
- Fostering Appropriate Reliance on Large Language Models: The Role of Explanations, Sources, and Inconsistencies
- Certification Labels for Trustworthy AI: Insights From an Empirical Mixed-Method Study
- Transparent AI Disclosure Obligations: Who, What, When, Where, Why, How
- Humans, AI, and Context: Understanding End-Users' Trust in a Real-World Computer Vision Application
- (Un)making AI Magic: a Design Taxonomy
- Plan-Then-Execute: An Empirical Study of User Trust and Team Performance When Using LLM Agents As A Daily Assistant
- TeamVision: An AI-powered Learning Analytics System for Supporting Reflection in Team-based Healthcare Simulation
- Prior and Posterior Networks: A Survey on Evidential Deep Learning Methods For Uncertainty Estimation
- Amplifying Minority Voices: AI-Mediated Devil's Advocate System for Inclusive Group Decision-Making
- Thoughtful Adoption of NLP for Civic Participation: Understanding Differences Among Policymakers
- Impact Assessment Card: Communicating Risks and Benefits of AI Uses
- NeuroBridge: Using Generative AI to Bridge Cross-neurotype Communication Differences through Neurotypical Perspective-taking
- AI Trust Reshaping Administrative Burdens: Understanding Trust-Burden Dynamics in LLM-Assisted Benefits Systems
- "Even explanations will not help in trusting [this] fundamentally biased system": A Predictive Policing Case-Study
- Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanations
- Predicting Trust In Autonomous Vehicles: Modeling Young Adult Psychosocial Traits, Risk-Benefit Attitudes, And Driving Factors With Machine Learning
- Contextualized AI for Cyber Defense: An Automated Survey using LLMs